GMG Classical Music Forum

The Back Room => The Diner => Topic started by: bhodges on November 10, 2020, 01:09:34 PM

Title: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: bhodges on November 10, 2020, 01:09:34 PM
Dear forum members,

The moderators have decided to close the old thread and provide a fresh start with a new SINGLE thread on USA Politics. This thread will cover all discussions on political developments, movements, and personalities in the United States of America. Guidelines below are similar to the ones before.

GENERAL COMMENTS:

This forum is first and foremost a classical music forum and community. The Diner offers an opportunity for members to talk also about other topics than classical music, including politics. But what binds us and which is the purpose of this forum, is an interest in classical music.

Those who show no or little interest in participating in the classical music discussions on this forum, and whose sole or main focus is on discussing politics, are encouraged to consider pursuing that interest elsewhere.

We are renewing our efforts to provide opportunity for a genuine, civil and intelligent discussions on USA politics. But we want to make very clear that maintaining a positive and cordial atmosphere between our members takes absolute priority. The disingenuity and animosity that can mark some of these discussions are not in the general interest of the forum.

GUIDELINES:

1. All discussions on USA politics are to be conducted in this thread. Any other post on USA politics, inside or outside The Diner, will be deleted immediately.
2. All discussions are to be conducted in a civil manner. From the general forum guidelines: Please treat other members [...] with courtesy and respect. [...] do not make personal attacks, belittle, make fun of, or insult another member.
3. Trolling will not be tolerated, and this restriction in particular will be more rigorously enforced than before. From the general forum guidelines: A forum troll is someone who intentionally posts derogatory or inflammatory messages [...] with the deliberate intent to bait users into responding. This can range from very subtle jibes to outright personal attacks. [...] do not try to deliberately provoke another member into an ill-natured argument.
4. ALL posts should be aimed at contributing to a genuine and meaningful discussion and contain a personal explanation or position. Posts with only or mainly links or quotes are strongly discouraged. Posts need to be on topic and without comments on other members.
5. Any questionable posts will be deleted in their entirety, including any replies that quote them, and the moderating decisions to that effect are not open for discussion or correspondence.

Thank you,
The moderators
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 10, 2020, 02:51:16 PM
The scary data point this morning is that 70% of Republicans have swallowed Trump's completely unsubstantiated agitprop that he cannot have lost this fair and free election.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: bhodges on November 10, 2020, 03:00:10 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 10, 2020, 02:51:16 PM
The scary data point this morning is that 70% of Republicans have swallowed Trump's completely unsubstantiated agitprop that he cannot have lost this fair and free election.

Yes. Though I don't officially "follow" him on Twitter (most of his 88.9M followers are bots, anyway), I encourage anyone who hasn't seen his Twitter feed to take a look, especially since he has insisted on governing by Twitter, which is absurd. I think any public figure, including him, should be on Twitter. But not to discuss policy, or wail like a 5-year-old (no offense to 5-year-olds), or create fake drama where there is no need. And now, it's just getting embarrassing.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump

Meanwhile, I've ordered one of these t-shirts. This story is going to be comedic gold for years.

https://shopclass.threadless.com/designs/four-seasons-total-landscaping/?fbclid=IwAR101yPaOr2q9sDnxL6plqyRiKffMrPu6ziwZI2ZKhkC-QbdqUXvvfC6AWM#

--Bruce
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on November 10, 2020, 03:29:25 PM
Bruce: how do you personally rate Trump's chances of ratfucking his way into a second term?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: bhodges on November 10, 2020, 03:34:20 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on November 10, 2020, 03:29:25 PM
Bruce: how do you personally rate Trump's chances of ratfucking his way into a second term?

I don't consider myself the best gauge, but so far, all of his legal efforts have been dismissed. That said, I'm concerned by today's departure of some top Department of Defense officials:

https://twitter.com/renato_mariotti/status/1326263924027748352?s=20

--Bruce
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 10, 2020, 03:35:43 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on November 10, 2020, 03:29:25 PM
Trump's chances of ratfucking his way into a second term?

Zero.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 10, 2020, 03:43:58 PM
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-10/barr-s-gambit-opens-path-to-tarring-biden-win-without-undoing-it

Seems like there's potential for things to get messy.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 10, 2020, 03:46:56 PM
Quote from: Brewski on November 10, 2020, 03:00:10 PM
Yes. Though I don't officially "follow" him on Twitter (most of his 88.9M followers are bots, anyway), I encourage anyone who hasn't seen his Twitter feed to take a look, especially since he has insisted on governing by Twitter, which is absurd. I think any public figure, including him, should be on Twitter. But not to discuss policy, or wail like a 5-year-old (no offense to 5-year-olds), or create fake drama where there is no need. And now, it's just getting embarrassing.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump

Meanwhile, I've ordered one of these t-shirts. This story is going to be comedic gold for years.

https://shopclass.threadless.com/designs/four-seasons-total-landscaping/?fbclid=IwAR101yPaOr2q9sDnxL6plqyRiKffMrPu6ziwZI2ZKhkC-QbdqUXvvfC6AWM#

--Bruce

Come get your legal advice and your lawn & garden supplies between the crematorium and the adult appliance boutique.  Come for the mulch, stay for the French ticklers!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: bhodges on November 10, 2020, 03:54:22 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 10, 2020, 03:46:56 PM
Come get your legal advice and your lawn & garden supplies between the crematorium and the adult appliance boutique.  Come for the mulch, stay for the French ticklers!

It's going to provide comedians, writers, and filmmakers with comedy for years. Exhibit A: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAyh2xPrFvo&fbclid

--Bruce
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 10, 2020, 03:56:42 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 10, 2020, 03:35:43 PM
Zero.

Not zero. you're forgetting the disgrace of the GOP Senators roundly acquitting him.  They're still busily enabling his destructive tantrum.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: premont on November 10, 2020, 04:11:53 PM
Opinion polls are what they are. All the same I had expected Biden to win the election with a somewhat larger margin. But Trump got rather many votes. Are we sure, that some of the orange swindlers votes weren't the result of fraud?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 10, 2020, 04:23:27 PM
Quote from: (: premont :) on November 10, 2020, 04:11:53 PM
Opinion polls are what they are. All the same I had expected Biden to win the election with a somewhat larger margin. But Trump got rather many votes. Are we sure, that some of the orange swindlers votes weren't the result of fraud?

Despite the tendentious amplification by the right-wing disinformation ecosystem, voter fraud is extremely rare.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Zeus on November 10, 2020, 04:37:23 PM
Quote from: Brewski on November 10, 2020, 03:54:22 PM
It's going to provide comedians, writers, and filmmakers with comedy for years. Exhibit A: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAyh2xPrFvo&fbclid

--Bruce

Exhibit B:
https://twitter.com/nanglish/status/1325242917519233024

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Zeus on November 10, 2020, 04:41:08 PM
Quote from: Brewski on November 10, 2020, 01:09:34 PM
2. All discussions are to be conducted in a civil manner. From the general forum guidelines: Please treat other members [...] with courtesy and respect. [...] do not make personal attacks, belittle, make fun of, or insult another member.

I propose a simple check to determine if your post meets this criteria: would you say this, and in this way, at dinner with your boss?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: bhodges on November 10, 2020, 05:13:41 PM
Quote from: Zeus on November 10, 2020, 04:37:23 PM
Exhibit B:
https://twitter.com/nanglish/status/1325242917519233024

Yes, very good -- I retweeted that myself.  ;D

Quote from: Zeus on November 10, 2020, 04:41:08 PM
I propose a simple check to determine if your post meets this criteria: would you say this, and in this way, at dinner with your boss?

Good barometer. Or as one friend said, "Don't post anything you wouldn't want to see on the front page of The New York Times."

--Bruce
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 10, 2020, 05:19:03 PM
Quote from: Zeus on November 10, 2020, 04:41:08 PM
I propose a simple check to determine if your post meets this criteria: would you say this, and in this way, at dinner with your boss?

Good, plain sense.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on November 10, 2020, 05:48:25 PM
Except we're often in a power relationship with our bosses that means we can't speak our minds no matter how politely.

Re the bad polling: I heard someone criticizing them point out that while one can talk of the "shy" Trump voter skewing the figures they were also well out in some uncontroversial downticket races where shyness could barely have been a factor.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 10, 2020, 06:10:10 PM
Joe pulled it off.  No surprise.  The surprising thing is just how poorly Dems did overall.  They were boosted by a pandemic and a depression, and yet they lost seats in the House, and Republicans look set to hold a Senate majority.  So much for packing the court, impeaching Trump's SCOTUS picks, a green new deal, etc.  From a long term perspective, Trump's gains with minorities point a way forward from Republicans later in the decade and in the 2030s.  Dems have to come up with a better game plan. 

And then there's the 2020 census and how it will shape the mid-terms.

But before that, I gotta see cabinet picks.  The big three plus the head of the NSC matter, while all else is fluff.  As long as Samantha Power doesn't get a seat at the table, it will be acceptable.  I'm thinking we could see a female DOD chief (Flournoy) and Treasury chief (Brainard).  Safe enough picks. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 10, 2020, 07:05:12 PM
Trump advisers privately express pessimism about heading off Biden's win = None of them has the backbone to tell the man-baby the truth.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on November 10, 2020, 07:25:39 PM
I honestly don't see Trump conceding and he'll probably end up being evicted from the White House. He'll never admit defeat even though by large he simply doesn't have the electoral college votes. He can contest Michigan, Arizona, Nevada, Georgia, Pennsylvania all he wants, there hasn't been any hard evidence that voter fraud has occurred and even if this ends up at the Supreme Court, they'll throw it out, because it's not just one or two states he's contesting, but many of them. Many believe this to be another 2000 election, but it's not. It's quite evident that Trump lost. Some news commentator mentioned that the mail-in ballot is a Republican's worst enemy, I would say no, a Republican's worst enemy is supporting this cretin we currently have in office. I can guarantee you that if the shoe was on the foot and Biden lost, this wouldn't be happening, because we have to remember that Biden isn't a stable genius like Trump.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 11, 2020, 12:10:29 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on November 10, 2020, 03:29:25 PM
Bruce: how do you personally rate Trump's chances of ratfucking his way into a second term?

Primarily this is about the next elections, the midterms and 2024.

The "stolen 2020 elections" was intended as the successor to the Barack HUSSEIN Obama, Birther meme. Just a little thing to delegitimize the four years Biden - Harris will have.

However, I get the feeling McConnell are watching if this stuff is getting some traction, just as the previously unthinkinkable Trump 2024 notion, and so they are just going to see where this is getting them.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 11, 2020, 12:14:42 AM
It's rather painful to see Biden going through the "bipartisan" moves, even while McConnell c.s. are sawing off his legs at the knees, by calling the elections illegit.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 11, 2020, 12:40:33 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 10, 2020, 06:10:10 PM
Joe pulled it off.  No surprise.  The surprising thing is just how poorly Dems did overall.  They were boosted by a pandemic and a depression, and yet they lost seats in the House, and Republicans look set to hold a Senate majority.  So much for packing the court, impeaching Trump's SCOTUS picks, a green new deal, etc.  From a long term perspective, Trump's gains with minorities point a way forward from Republicans later in the decade and in the 2030s.  Dems have to come up with a better game plan.

Yes, the Dems did poorly althou progressives did well. Every Dem advocating Medicare for all got re-elected. Overall Dems need better game plan and it's very simple: Serve your base like the Republicans do. 80-90 % of the Democrat's base want Medicare for all, so advocating medicare for all should be a no-brainer, except the insurance companies and Big Pharma have bought corporate Dems so their hands are tied...  :-\  Left wing policies (drug / minimum wage policies)  won in referendums in this election even in states where Biden lost to Trump.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 11, 2020, 12:53:50 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on November 10, 2020, 07:25:39 PM
I honestly don't see Trump conceding and he'll probably end up being evicted from the White House. He'll never admit defeat even though by large he simply doesn't have the electoral college votes. He can contest Michigan, Arizona, Nevada, Georgia, Pennsylvania all he wants, there hasn't been any hard evidence that voter fraud has occurred and even if this ends up at the Supreme Court, they'll throw it out, because it's not just one or two states he's contesting, but many of them. Many believe this to be another 2000 election, but it's not. It's quite evident that Trump lost. Some news commentator mentioned that the mail-in ballot is a Republican's worst enemy, I would say no, a Republican's worst enemy is supporting this cretin we currently have in office. I can guarantee you that if the shoe was on the foot and Biden lost, this wouldn't be happening, because we have to remember that Biden isn't a stable genius like Trump.

At best Trump can have like 95 Biden votes nullified in a state where Biden won by thousands of votes. Even re-counts can chance the votes more and it doesn't change the outcome of this election. This election fraud circus is to give Trump a "heroic" way out in the eyes of his supporters.

Biden suffers from mental decline due to age, but despite of this he is fresh wind of sanity after four years of Trump.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 11, 2020, 01:00:43 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 11, 2020, 12:40:33 AM
Yes, the Dems did poorly althou progressives did well. Every Dem advocating Medicare for all got re-elected. Overall Dems need better game plan and it's very simple: Serve your base like the Republicans do.

In reality the Republicans do not do this at all.

They serve the one percent, and deliver (under Trump) carnival hi-jinks for the base.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 11, 2020, 01:12:46 AM
Quote from: Herman on November 11, 2020, 01:00:43 AM
In reality the Republicans do not do this at all.

They serve the one percent, and deliver (under Trump) carnival hi-jinks for the base.

Both The Republicans and the Dems serve the one percent, but at least the Republicans know how to make their ignorant base believe they are being served. The Democratic base is smarter, better educated and can see they are poorly served. It seems like the corporate Dems are not that interested of political power. They are good as long as donor money keeps coming...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Jo498 on November 11, 2020, 01:21:56 AM
I am a bit surprised that the press/public mostly sees it as a done deal despite the legal fights to come. Is the main difference to 2000 Bush vs. Gore that too many states would have to be revised/recounted or that the supposed indications of irregularities are generally too weak to get recounts or the like even going?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 11, 2020, 01:37:38 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on November 11, 2020, 01:21:56 AM
I am a bit surprised that the press/public mostly sees it as a done deal despite the legal fights to come. Is the main difference to 2000 Bush vs. Gore that too many states would have to be revised/recounted or that the supposed indications of irregularities are generally too weak to get recounts or the like even going?

That, and the margins are much bigger. In Florida 2000 I believe Bush won by 500 votes.

In 2020 Biden's margins in PA, Nevada and Georgia are in the 10.000s.

You have to understand the GOP / Trump mindset, in which Democratic voters aren't really legit Americans, because they don't bow to Trump. That makes their votes potentially illegal.

Remember Trump refused to give California disaster relief in the fire season, because CA is solidly D in elections. So they're not Americans.

It's circular reasoning, obviously, but its the best these people can do.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BWV 1080 on November 11, 2020, 02:56:04 AM
What are the odds?


One in five COVID-19 patients develop mental illness within 90 days - study
By Kate Kelland
3 MIN READ

LONDON (Reuters) - Many COVID-19 survivors are likely to be at greater risk of developing mental illness, psychiatrists said on Monday, after a large study found 20% of those infected with the coronavirus are diagnosed with a psychiatric disorder within 90 days.

Anxiety, depression and insomnia were most common among recovered COVID-19 patients in the study who developed mental health problems. The researchers from Britain's Oxford University also found significantly higher risks of dementia, a brain impairment condition.

https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-mental-illness-int-idUSKBN27P35N

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 11, 2020, 03:12:45 AM
Quote from: Herman on November 11, 2020, 01:37:38 AM
Trump refused to give California disaster relief in the fire season

Fact check: the statement above is partially true but it's not the whole story.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/16/us/trump-california-wildfire-relief.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/16/us/trump-california-wildfire-relief.html)

Quote from: The New York Times

Trump Reverses Decision to Reject California's Request for Wildfire Relief

MORAGA, Calif. — President Trump reversed himself on Friday, approving a package of wildfire disaster relief for California hours after officials from his administration had explained why the state should not receive the aid.

The abrupt turnaround came after the president spoke with Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, and Representative Kevin McCarthy, a Republican and the House minority leader, with the White House saying the men "presented a convincing case" for the state receiving the aid.

The disaster relief aid covers six major wildfires that scorched more than 1.8 million acres, destroyed thousands of structures and caused at least three deaths last month.

"Just got off the phone with President Trump who has approved our Major Disaster Declaration request," Mr. Newsom of California said in a statement. "Grateful for his quick response."

The relief package adds to the 68 fire-related aid packages for California that Mr. Trump has approved during his tenure: 61 for firefighting, five for disaster relief and two for support of emergency services.

California has suffered a series of huge fires since August, when freak lightning storms ignited hundreds of blazes, some of which grew to be the largest in modern state history. Subsequent fires in September tore through parts of the Sierra Nevada and wine country north of San Francisco.

The initial rejection was unusual but not unprecedented: A 2017 report by the Congressional Research Service found that from 1974 to 2016 presidents denied requests for disaster relief an average of 2.9 times per year during nonelection years, and 2.1 times in a year with a presidential election.

Since the enactment in 1953 of a federal disaster relief act, presidents have been authorized to issue declarations that provide states with federal assistance in response to natural and man-made incidents. The requests are judged based on criteria that take into account damage to infrastructure, existing insurance coverage and a state's population, among others.

But the president ultimately has the authority to approve or reject a disaster aid request regardless whether the criteria are met.

Mr. Newsom said on Friday morning that he would appeal the denial — and had apparent success in persuading the president during their afternoon phone call.
...

Miles Taylor, a former senior Trump administration official who has endorsed Joseph R. Biden Jr.'s presidential campaign, said in August that Mr. Trump's reluctance to aid California was overtly political.

"He told us to stop giving money to people whose houses had burned down from a wildfire because he was so rageful that people in the state of California didn't support him and that politically it wasn't a base for him," Mr. Taylor says in a campaign video.


However, many of the largest fires in California over the past four years have ravaged areas that tend to vote Republican.

All emphases are mine.





Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: bhodges on November 11, 2020, 03:47:45 AM
And I see that some here need a reminder already (my emphasis):

"3. Trolling will not be tolerated, and this restriction in particular will be more rigorously enforced than before. From the general forum guidelines: A forum troll is someone who intentionally posts derogatory or inflammatory messages [...] with the deliberate intent to bait users into responding. This can range from very subtle jibes to outright personal attacks. [...] do not try to deliberately provoke another member into an ill-natured argument."

You know, listening to some Mozart puts me in a good mood. I recommend it.

-Bruce
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 11, 2020, 03:54:41 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 11, 2020, 01:04:29 AM
Trump family voted by mail.

Fact check: partially true.

Trump himself and various members of his family and administration voted by mail at various points in time. However, for the 2020 Presidential elections Donald Trump and Melania Trump voted in person. Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner voted by mail.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/oct/25/facebook-posts/no-trump-did-not-vote-twice-nov-3-election/ (https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/oct/25/facebook-posts/no-trump-did-not-vote-twice-nov-3-election/):

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/03/us/politics/melania-trump-vote-mask.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/03/us/politics/melania-trump-vote-mask.html)

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyle/ivanka-trump-mocked-over-desperate-us-election-day-message/FZ6KKAM2JQLFK467SNRVSJHOJQ/ (https://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyle/ivanka-trump-mocked-over-desperate-us-election-day-message/FZ6KKAM2JQLFK467SNRVSJHOJQ/):

Quote
A lot of people voted by mail because there is a pandemic.

A few months ago some people here, including you, expressed great concern that the USPS headed by Trump's minion Louis DeJoy will deliberately mismanage, mishandle and delay mail ballots. Do you still believe that to have been the case?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 11, 2020, 04:25:42 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on November 10, 2020, 07:25:39 PM
I honestly don't see Trump conceding and he'll probably end up being evicted from the White House. He'll never admit defeat even though by large he simply doesn't have the electoral college votes. He can contest Michigan, Arizona, Nevada, Georgia, Pennsylvania all he wants, there hasn't been any hard evidence that voter fraud has occurred and even if this ends up at the Supreme Court, they'll throw it out, because it's not just one or two states he's contesting, but many of them. Many believe this to be another 2000 election, but it's not. It's quite evident that Trump lost. Some news commentator mentioned that the mail-in ballot is a Republican's worst enemy, I would say no, a Republican's worst enemy is supporting this cretin we currently have in office. I can guarantee you that if the shoe was on the foot and Biden lost, this wouldn't be happening, because we have to remember that Biden isn't a stable genius like Trump.

It's a matter of time, and of how much distrust and hate Trump and his spineless enablers gin up in Trumpworld.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 11, 2020, 04:36:23 AM
From newspaper op-eds to network TV interviews, Ben Ginsberg, recently retired from his work for the law firm that has represented President Trump's campaigns, has denounced the baseless claims by Trump and his GOP allies that last week's election was rigged and rife with fraud.

"For the president of the United States, the leader of the free world and head of the Republican Party, to make completely unsubstantiated charges about our elections being rigged is not right," he said in an interview.

Whereas Ginsberg said the 2000 recount was a legitimate legal issue — a recount in a single state with the two candidates separated by just 537 votes — he said the Trump campaign has no legal basis to dispute the victory by President-elect Joe Biden.

RTWT here (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/why-gop-superlawyer-ben-ginsberg-is-bucking-his-party-and-blasting-trumps-baseless-election-claims/2020/11/10/f2aa7056-236d-11eb-8599-406466ad1b8e_story.html).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 11, 2020, 04:51:55 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on November 11, 2020, 01:21:56 AM
I am a bit surprised that the press/public mostly sees it as a done deal despite the legal fights to come. Is the main difference to 2000 Bush vs. Gore that too many states would have to be revised/recounted or that the supposed indications of irregularities are generally too weak to get recounts or the like even going?


The Electoral College meets on December 14th.  The victor will be selected then.  The lawsuits will not change the constitutionally mandated process, and recounts almost never result in the desired outcomes of those demanding recounts, and certainly would not here.  That applied in 2000, as well.  It's over.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 11, 2020, 04:54:25 AM
Christian Schneider:

According to Joseph Stalin biographer Simon Sebag Montefiore, Stalin grew so powerful that when he gave a speech and mispronounced a word, every speaker would mispronounce the word in the same way.

"If I'd said it right, Stalin would have felt I was correcting him," remembered Stalin protégé Vyacheslav Molotov, noting the Soviet leader was "very touchy and proud."

Donald Trump is obviously not Stalin: he doesn't conduct show trials, send his political opponents to gulags, or starve millions of his own people to death.

In a way, though, that makes the embarrassing post-2020 election obeisance of Republican politicians even more confounding. If they rightly acknowledge Trump's election loss was not due to vote "fraud" and concede Joe Biden will, in fact, be president on January 20 next year, the worst they will suffer is an angry tweet from the president.

And yet they trot right out, single file, humiliating themselves in order to soothe the "very touchy and proud" adolescent in the Oval Office. Newt Gingrich, a man who knows how elections work, said Trump fell to a "corrupt and stolen election." On the Senate floor, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Trump is "100 percent within his right" to pursue recounts and litigation.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Handelian on November 11, 2020, 05:00:29 AM
It amuses me as a disinterested third party from another country, the self-righteous condemnation of Trump for contesting the election and accusing him of stirring up hate. I seem to remember that four years ago there were incredible protests by the other side concerning Trump's victory with unsubstantiated claims and also people demonstrating for weeks saying how much they hated Trump. A guy I read was even attacked by one of the mob of Trump haters for questioning their motives!  :D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BWV 1080 on November 11, 2020, 05:04:56 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 11, 2020, 04:54:25 AM
Christian Schneider:

According to Joseph Stalin biographer Simon Sebag Montefiore, Stalin grew so powerful that when he gave a speech and mispronounced a word, every speaker would mispronounce the word in the same way.

"If I'd said it right, Stalin would have felt I was correcting him," remembered Stalin protégé Vyacheslav Molotov, noting the Soviet leader was "very touchy and proud."

Donald Trump is obviously not Stalin: he doesn't conduct show trials, send his political opponents to gulags, or starve millions of his own people to death.

In a way, though, that makes the embarrassing post-2020 election obeisance of Republican politicians even more confounding. If they rightly acknowledge Trump's election loss was not due to vote "fraud" and concede Joe Biden will, in fact, be president on January 20 next year, the worst they will suffer is an angry tweet from the president.

And yet they trot right out, single file, humiliating themselves in order to soothe the "very touchy and proud" adolescent in the Oval Office. Newt Gingrich, a man who knows how elections work, said Trump fell to a "corrupt and stolen election." On the Senate floor, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Trump is "100 percent within his right" to pursue recounts and litigation.

Not confounding at all, they don't want to alienate Trump supporters who have the power to replace them in the next primary.  They all know the fraud allegations are baseless and Biden will be president.  There is also some quid pro quo for the Dems attempts to delegitimize Trump's 2016 victory.  This is why you hear language like ' he has every right to look into allegations' 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on November 11, 2020, 05:08:51 AM
Quote from: Herman on November 11, 2020, 12:14:42 AM
It's rather painful to see Biden going through the "bipartisan" moves, even while McConnell c.s. are sawing off his legs at the knees, by calling the elections illegit.

No, Biden is doing exactly the right thing. You can relax. The dispute of the election is just a fund raising scam. The RNC is strapped for cash and Trump supporters are sheep lining up to be fleeced. Close to 0% of the money raised by the supposed legal fund to contest election results will be used for that purpose. (That is, 0% of any donation under $5,000) The money goes to super PACs and the RNC. Mitch knows this and Joe knows this. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 11, 2020, 05:09:56 AM
Saw this story (on CNN) this morning about how some of the GOP are trying to discredit votes in Nevada claiming that people who had a change of address to a different state were not allowed to vote in Nevada.  The problem is:  the votes are from people in the military and/or their spouses who are still legally residents of Nevada (per state and federal law)!  Or they could also be college kids!

https://www.wral.com/military-spouses-say-gop-labeled-their-votes-fraudulent/19380286/

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 11, 2020, 05:16:15 AM
Quote from: BWV 1080 on November 11, 2020, 05:04:56 AMThere is also some quid pro quo for the Dems attempts to delegitimize Trump's 2016 victory.


There is always political value in this, which is why Dems did it in both 2016 and 2000.  It has roots older than that because of its factional utility.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 11, 2020, 06:22:00 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 11, 2020, 03:54:41 AM

A few months ago some people here, including you, expressed great concern that the USPS headed by Trump's minion Louis DeJoy will deliberately mismanage, mishandle and delay mail ballots. Do you still believe that to have been the case?

      Do you think this is a matter of belief? You just fact checked a claim about California disaster relief. Beliefs and concerns don't justify themselves, do they?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 11, 2020, 06:34:21 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 11, 2020, 06:22:00 AM
      Do you think this is a matter of belief? You just fact checked a claim about California disaster relief. Beliefs and concerns don't justify themselves, do they?

So you really claim that the USPS did deliberately mishandle, msimanage and delay some, or many, or most, mail ballots, correct?

Beliefs and concerns can, and sometimes do, justify themselves --- at least that's what you repeatedly stated about the former.




Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on November 11, 2020, 06:50:14 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 11, 2020, 04:25:42 AM
It's a matter of time, and of how much distrust and hate Trump and his spineless enablers gin up in Trumpworld.

As I was telling Dave (SonicMan) in the 'Missing Members' thread, it's scary to think how much more damage Trump can do since he's still in office and can't be ousted legally until January.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 11, 2020, 07:03:44 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 11, 2020, 06:34:21 AM
So you really claim that the USPS did deliberately mishandle, msimanage and delay some, or many, or most, mail ballots, correct?

Beliefs and concerns can, and sometimes do, justify themselves --- at least that's what you repeatedly stated about the former.






     No, I don't make any claim about facts that can't be supported about the mail delays. And no, nothing is true because it's believed. Preferably, it's believed because it's true.

     It could be that DeJoy delayed mail delivery for no other purpose than to save money. I doubt that is the case. I think the destruction of mail sorting machines was not a money saving operation. We are entitled to put the most likely construction on the facts as they are. Only then can you have beliefs and concerns.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 11, 2020, 07:07:42 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 11, 2020, 07:03:44 AM
     No, I don't make any claim about facts that can't be supported
.

Very good.


Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on November 11, 2020, 07:10:55 AM
Quote from: BWV 1080 on November 11, 2020, 05:04:56 AM
Not confounding at all, they don't want to alienate Trump supporters who have the power to replace them in the next primary.  They all know the fraud allegations are baseless and Biden will be president.  There is also some quid pro quo for the Dems attempts to delegitimize Trump's 2016 victory.  This is why you hear language like ' he has every right to look into allegations'


It also gives them an excuse to obstruct Biden every way they can and motivate votes in both 2022 and 2024.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on November 11, 2020, 07:15:51 AM
Might as well drop this here.

At least one section of the Proud Boys has decided now is a good time to announce it has been, is, and always will be a bunch of white supremacists.

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/11/civil-war-brewing-inside-proud-boys-as-top-leader-says-hes-done-pretending-he-isnt-a-nazi/

One version of the story I've seen says they've actually changed their name to Proud Goys.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 11, 2020, 07:27:54 AM
     
     Proud Boys Infighting Sees Leading Member Form Breakaway Group to Fight 'White Genocide' (https://www.newsweek.com/proud-boys-based-stickman-enrique-tarrio-goys-1546597)

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 11, 2020, 07:48:12 AM
Quote from: JBS on November 11, 2020, 07:10:55 AMIt also gives them an excuse to obstruct Biden every way they can and motivate votes in both 2022 and 2024.


They do not need excuses.  They are the opposition party.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 11, 2020, 09:56:26 AM
A record number of Republican women will serve in the House after the GOP ate into Democratic majority (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/11/10/house-races-historic-gains-gop-women-erode-democratic-majority/6169709002/)

The GOP ground game was solid.  Also, looks who's back:

The race that is sending Darrell Issa back to Congress carries lessons for California (https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-11-10/california-race-issa-campa-najjar-carries-lessons)

Huzzah!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 11, 2020, 10:01:50 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on November 11, 2020, 06:50:14 AM
As I was telling Dave (SonicMan) in the 'Missing Members' thread, it's scary to think how much more damage Trump can do since he's still in office and can't be ousted legally until January.

Headline today, giving the lie to the "the policies matter, the character doesn't" enablers:

Chaotic presidential transition brings vulnerability, security risks to nation

read: Trump being an asshole brings vulnerability, security risks to nation
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 11, 2020, 10:03:56 AM
Trump lawyers suffer embarrassing rebukes from judges over voter fraud claims

Who knew the courts would be tougher than Hannity?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 11, 2020, 10:19:46 AM
Quote from: Headline today on November 11, 2020, 10:01:50 AM
Chaotic presidential transition brings vulnerability, security risks to nation

What are those exact vulnerability and security risks to nation? Does the article name them?


Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 11, 2020, 10:33:11 AM
Quote from: Unnamed author, unnamed article, unnamed source on November 11, 2020, 10:03:56 AM
Trump lawyers suffer embarrassing rebukes from judges over voter fraud claims

Since when is a banana republic dictator supposed to have his will presented in courts by lawyers, let alone rebuked by judges? Is not a banana republic dictator supposed to have his will implemented without delay by anyone, judges and courts included?

Boy, I would just love to watch live the first ever dictator in North America, ever to be arrested in, and evicted under military escort, from the presidential residence, and the first ever North American banana republic returning to what it's ever been, even under its ousted dictator: a republic ruled by the rule of law.



Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 11, 2020, 11:01:23 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 11, 2020, 10:19:46 AM
What are those exact vulnerability and security risks to nation? Does the article name them?

I will re-post:

"I imagine it is stuff.  Perhaps things."

A question to the moderator who deleted the first response, how does this violate the new rules?  The intention of the post is to point out the vagueness and lack of specifics in the so far ambiguous concerns about security risks.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on November 11, 2020, 11:02:10 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 11, 2020, 10:33:11 AM
Since when is a banana republic dictator supposed to have his will presented in courts by lawyers, let alone rebuked by judges? Is not a banana republic dictator supposed to have his will implemented without delay by anyone, judges and courts included?

Boy, I would just love to watch live the first ever dictator in North America, ever to be arrested in, and evicted under military escort, from the presidential residence, and the first ever North American banana republic returning to what it's ever been, even under its ousted dictator: a republic ruled by the rule of law.

It's all political theater. The election challenge doesn't have to be a serious one, since the object is to raise funds for future political action and paying off campaign debt. Trump's lawyers are used to being humiliated. That's what they're paid for. He has launched thousands of frivolous lawsuits in his life. No one takes them seriously. Trump has attempted to turn the U.S. into a banana republic, but he proved just as incompetent in that venture as at everything else he's done in his life — except perhaps playing a business tycoon on "reality" TV.

Quote from: Todd on November 11, 2020, 11:01:23 AM
I will re-post:

"I imagine it is stuff.  Perhaps things."

A question to the moderator who deleted the first response, how does this violate the new rules?  The intention of the post is to point out the vagueness and lack of specifics in the so far ambiguous concerns about security risks.

I understood Todd's post as it was intended and agree that it wasn't trolling. It was just a dry way of asking for specific information.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 11, 2020, 11:16:29 AM
Biden's planned "day one" executive actions include:

- Rejoin Paris climate accord
- Reverse Muslim ban
- Reinstate DACA
- Reverse Trump rollback of Obama heath/environmental rules

Kyle Kulinski's comment: Wonderful stuff and this kind of start might be the best part of Biden presidency.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 11, 2020, 11:20:40 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 11, 2020, 11:16:29 AM
Biden's planned "day one" executive actions include:

- Rejoin Paris climate accord
- Reverse Muslim ban
- Reinstate DACA
- Reverse Trump rollback of Obama heath/environmental rules

Kyle Kulinski's comment: Wonderful stuff and this kind of start might be the best part of Biden presidency.


It is instructive that with respect to DACA, an executive order will be used to repeal an executive order than countermanded an executive order.  I guess that's democratic.

On ACA changes, that will be tougher, because Congress changed some of the ACA.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Handelian on November 11, 2020, 11:25:27 AM
Quote from: JBS on November 11, 2020, 07:10:55 AM

It also gives them an excuse to obstruct Biden every way they can and motivate votes in both 2022 and 2024.

Excuse me, but I seem to remember Democrats obstructing Trump in every way when he was elected. Why the double standards?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 11, 2020, 11:42:01 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on November 11, 2020, 11:02:10 AM
Trump has attempted to turn the U.S. into a banana republic

Seriously now, I am a disinterested third party from another country (I borrow this apt phrase from another poster) --- with a twist: I was born and raised in a country named the Socialist Republic of Romania which was a Communist dictatorship ever since it was proclaimed (December 30, 1947) until it fell (December 22, 1989). I know from personal experience exactly and precisely what a dictatorship is and looks like, and how a dictator behaves. With all due respect --- and actually very fortunately and very good for them --- not a single any other GMGer currently active can say that, with one possible exception (member pi2000). As such, it is my firm conviction that neither was Donald Trump a dictator nor did he try to become one, and that at no time between January 20, 2017 and January 20, 2020 did the USA have the slightest resemblance to a dictatorship in the making, let alone a full-fledged one.

Quote
I understood Todd's post as it was intended and agree that it wasn't trolling. It was just a dry way of asking for specific information.

Why Todd's post was considered trolling is beyon me, too. Maybe it was a misunderstanding.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 11, 2020, 11:50:51 AM
Quote from: Handelian on November 11, 2020, 11:25:27 AM
Excuse me, but I seem to remember Democrats obstructing Trump in every way when he was elected. Why the double standards?

Quod licet Iovi non licet bovi.  ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Handelian on November 11, 2020, 12:09:12 PM
Quote from: Florestan on November 11, 2020, 11:50:51 AM
Quod licet Iovi non licet bovi.  ;D ;D ;D

All double standards and self righteousness are fair in politics!  ;D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 11, 2020, 12:17:06 PM
Quote from: Handelian on November 11, 2020, 12:09:12 PM
All double standards and self righteousness are fair in politics!  ;D

We Romanians have a saying; politics is a whore. ;D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 11, 2020, 12:35:30 PM
Quote from: Florestan on November 11, 2020, 11:42:01 AM
Seriously now, I am a disinterested third party from another country (I borrow this apt phrase from another poster) --- with a twist: I was born and raised in a country named the Socialist Republic of Romania which was a Communist dictatorship ever since it was proclaimed (December 30, 1947) until it fell (December 22, 1989). I know from personal experience exactly and precisely what a dictatorship is and looks like, and how a dictator behaves. With all due respect --- and actually very fortunately and very good for them --- not a single any other GMGer currently active can say that, with one possible exception (member pi2000). As such, it is my firm conviction that neither was Donald Trump a dictator nor did he try to become one, and that at no time between January 20, 2017 and January 20, 2020 did the USA have the slightest resemblance to a dictatorship in the making, let alone a full-fledged one.

I understand what you mean and yes, the US has been nothing like Socialist Republic of Romania. That said, countries are not 0 % democratic or 100 % democratic. It's a scale. One country can be 78 % democratic, the next 81 % democratic and then one is only 26 % democratic and so on. Trump's actions pushed the US to less democratic direction. How much? Hard to say, but the direction is clear.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 11, 2020, 12:44:23 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 11, 2020, 12:35:30 PM
I understand what you mean and yes, the US has been nothing like Socialist Republic of Romania.

Thanks for conceding my point.


Quotecountries are not 0 % democratic or 100 % democratic.

Okay. What's your estimation of Finland?

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 11, 2020, 12:45:42 PM
Quote from: Brewski on November 11, 2020, 03:47:45 AMYou know, listening to some Mozart puts me in a good mood. I recommend it.

-Bruce

My plan for 2020 was to listen to a lot of Mozart, but I haven't listened to Mozart much and the year is ending in just 50 days...  :P
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on November 11, 2020, 12:47:49 PM
Quote from: Handelian on November 11, 2020, 11:25:27 AM
Excuse me, but I seem to remember Democrats obstructing Trump in every way when he was elected. Why the double standards?

But you don't recall the Republicans obstructing Obama in every possible way during his terms, especially the second? It the point of holding his SCOTUS nominee hostage for nearly a year and refusing to allow it to come to a vote?

Or Mitch McConnell saying that the proudest moments of his career came from obstructing every step Obama took?

I'm a long way from condoning this, I think it is shit. However, it is not one side always eating the shit sandwich, it goes both ways. At the very least I can say that the Dems obstructed T***p for political reasons, not the same ones the Reps had for obstructing Obama.

8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on November 11, 2020, 12:49:00 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 11, 2020, 12:45:42 PM
My plan for 2020 was to listen to a lot of Mozart, but I haven't listened to Mozart much and the year is ending in just 50 days...  :P

Well, you damn sure better get started. I've been holding up your end for now, Poju, but you need to see the team through December!  :D

8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 11, 2020, 12:53:05 PM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on November 11, 2020, 12:47:49 PM
I can say that the Dems obstructed T***p for political reasons, not the same ones the Reps had for obstructing Obama.

Just as I said: Quod licet Iovi non licet bovi..
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 11, 2020, 12:57:34 PM
Quote from: Florestan on November 11, 2020, 10:19:46 AM
What are those exact vulnerability and security risks to nation? Does the article name them?




     Trump doesn't know anything about sources and methods, and if he did he wouldn't care. It's not just what you reveal about information about a hostile nation, it's what the information reveals about the means used to get it. I would hope that no details about which sources and which methods appear in the news. It should be stuff, or possibly things.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 11, 2020, 12:59:09 PM
Quote from: Florestan on November 11, 2020, 12:44:23 PM
Thanks for conceding my point.

You're welcome.

Quote from: Florestan on November 11, 2020, 12:44:23 PMOkay. What's your estimation of Finland?

99.999 %  ;D Well, perhaps a little lower than that, but Finland is one of the most democratic/least corrupt* countries in the world.

* Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_Perceptions_Index) puts Finland at place 3 (2019) behind Denmark and New Zealand sharing the first place. The US is at place 23 and Romania 70. Somalia is considered the most corrupt of all countries.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 11, 2020, 01:05:15 PM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on November 11, 2020, 12:49:00 PM
Well, you damn sure better get started. I've been holding up your end for now, Poju, but you need to see the team through December!  :D

8)

Well, I did discover Haydn's Op. 20 last summer and that's not far from Mozart... ...maybe Mozart's Requiem could be proper listening to honour those who have died because of Covid-19?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 11, 2020, 01:06:04 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 11, 2020, 12:59:09 PM
99.999 %  ;D Well, perhaps a little lower than that, but Finland is one of the most democratic/least corrupt* countries in the world.

Well, we Romanians have a saying: "Every Gypsy man sings the praises of his own hammer!".
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on November 11, 2020, 01:40:41 PM
Quote from: Handelian on November 11, 2020, 11:25:27 AM
Excuse me, but I seem to remember Democrats obstructing Trump in every way when he was elected. Why the double standards?

If you are referring to the transition period for the Trump administration and the handover, this is nonsense. The Trump administration was unprepared to take power and as a consequence hundreds of Obama administration officials had to stay in their jobs while the incoming incompetents tried to get their act together. They were coddled and assisted the whole way.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 11, 2020, 01:47:27 PM
     
Quote from: 71 dB on November 11, 2020, 12:35:30 PM
I understand what you mean and yes, the US has been nothing like Socialist Republic of Romania. That said, countries are not 0 % democratic or 100 % democratic. It's a scale. One country can be 78 % democratic, the next 81 % democratic and then one is only 26 % democratic and so on. Trump's actions pushed the US to less democratic direction. How much? Hard to say, but the direction is clear.

     You are not an absolutist, so you may not recognize the kind of argument that treats categories as entirely distinct entities in themselves. Is Putin a dictator, or Duterte? Does the category of illiberal democracy "exist", or is it shorthand for a set of characteristics often found together, as is the case with fascism, if that's what fascism is. What form of government does Hungary have, as differentiated from what is practiced there?

     Next: The problem of universals, threat or menace? (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/smiley.gif)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 11, 2020, 01:53:03 PM
Quote from: drogulus on November 11, 2020, 01:47:27 PM
  Is Putin a dictator

Yes.

QuoteWhat form of government does Hungary have

Republic.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 11, 2020, 01:58:26 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on November 11, 2020, 01:40:41 PM
If you are referring to the transition period for the Trump administration and the handover, this is nonsense. The Trump administration was unprepared to take power and as a consequence hundreds of Obama administration officials had to stay in their jobs while the incoming incompetents tried to get their act together. They were coddled and assisted the whole way.

     Yes, just as Obama was set up for success by the Bush people, Trump was by the Obamans. It's the way it's been done going back as far as anyone remembers.

     
Quote from: Florestan on November 11, 2020, 01:06:04 PM
Well, we Romanians have a saying: "Every Gypsy man sings the praises of his own hammer!".

     Is that what you do?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 11, 2020, 01:59:02 PM
The Sweaty Clown Car Goes to Court:

"Kallman claims they were forcing observers to stand 20 feet away. The judge asks him for evidence of that. Kallman quickly retreats from the 20-feet claim.

Perfect:  The ultimate goal is illusory—Biden has won the election free and fair, and nibbling at such large margins is a flea convinced he's going to swallow the lion.

The short-term strategy gets laughed of court—anecdote may pass for "evidence" on Fox & Friends, but not to a judge.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 11, 2020, 02:14:56 PM

    Trump is ill-suited to be a dictator for the same reasons he is ill suited to be leader of anything other than his own rather dubious enterprises that were built to contain him. His admiration and desire to emulate dictators and not quite-tators is pronounced, though.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on November 11, 2020, 02:18:15 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 11, 2020, 10:01:50 AM
Headline today, giving the lie to the "the policies matter, the character doesn't" enablers:

Chaotic presidential transition brings vulnerability, security risks to nation

read: Trump being an asshole brings vulnerability, security risks to nation

It's certainly discerning to say the least. Just for the record, I'm not a Republican or Democrat, but I do feel that I'm a centrist in that I'm not onboard with the extremism of both parties (i. e. the far right/left). I do feel that Biden is more of the man for the job than Trump ever will be. If anything, let's hope he handles this COVID crisis with more care than the do nothing currently in office. I do think he will also help restore our place in the world, which we should be seen as an ally not an enemy and certainly not the butt end of a joke. Patching things up with China and France would be a good start.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 11, 2020, 02:20:33 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 11, 2020, 12:59:09 PM
You're welcome.

99.999 %  ;D Well, perhaps a little lower than that, but Finland is one of the most democratic/least corrupt* countries in the world.

* Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_Perceptions_Index) puts Finland at place 3 (2019) behind Denmark and New Zealand sharing the first place. The US is at place 23 and Romania 70. Somalia is considered the most corrupt of all countries.

     If I insist that Romania should be #5 do I have to get a new passport?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 11, 2020, 02:45:14 PM
Quote from: drogulus on November 11, 2020, 02:14:56 PM
    Trump is ill-suited to be a dictator for the same reasons he is ill suited to be leader of anything other than his own rather dubious enterprises that were built to contain him. His admiration and desire to emulate dictators and not quite-tators is pronounced, though.

His navel-gazing ineptitude notwithstanding, he's a bad precedent.  Our government only works when the actors are in good faith.

America's Next Authoritarian Will Be Much More Competent (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/11/trump-proved-authoritarians-can-get-elected-america/617023/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 11, 2020, 02:50:17 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 11, 2020, 02:45:14 PM
His navel-gazing ineptitude notwithstanding, he's a bad precedent.  Our government only works when the actors are in good faith.

America's Next Authoritarian Will Be Much More Competent (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/11/trump-proved-authoritarians-can-get-elected-america/617023/)

That's a good article. Sadly.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 11, 2020, 02:51:07 PM
Verily.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 11, 2020, 03:16:01 PM
Quote from: drogulus on November 11, 2020, 01:58:26 PM
     Is that what you do?

Probably. You tell me.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on November 11, 2020, 04:22:05 PM
Quote from: drogulus on November 11, 2020, 01:47:27 PM
     
     You are not an absolutist, so you may not recognize the kind of argument that treats categories as entirely distinct entities in themselves. Is Putin a dictator, or Duterte? Does the category of illiberal democracy "exist", or is it shorthand for a set of characteristics often found together, as is the case with fascism, if that's what fascism is. What form of government does Hungary have, as differentiated from what is practiced there?

     Next: The problem of universals, threat or menace? (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/smiley.gif)

Nominally a threat.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on November 11, 2020, 04:36:52 PM
Quote from: Dowder on November 11, 2020, 04:28:23 PM
Another senate victory for the GOP today. I fully expect the two Georgia seats to go red in January as the Dem power grab gets exposed further. I take it that Biden may still be the president after all the court challenges and recounting but once your bugaboo Trump is gone I doubt you'll get half the blue voters to turn out in the midterms. Meanwhile, MAGA is strong and growing in numbers. 

May God grant Trump health and vitality to get his presidency back in 2024. If he cannot run again, the Republicans will be ok so long as they stick with the populist agenda.

It's nice to have a dream.

I see the postal worker who initially charged all sorts of post office voter fraud in Erie PA recanted his story and admitted he made the whole thing up. I also see the cases which have gone to court now stand at 0 wins, 10 losses.

Curious how that power grab thing is going to play out. Other than you and Louis Gohmert I haven't seen anyone else buying into it much. It is a con to raise more money from the gullible people out there who subscribe to the T***p Cult of Personality.

When it runs out of steam, as it will (soon), then a new con will arise. When you are dealing with petty grifters, cons are the only thing you can expect.

8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 11, 2020, 04:42:02 PM
Quote from: Florestan on November 11, 2020, 11:42:01 AM
Seriously now, I am a disinterested third party from another country (I borrow this apt phrase from another poster) --- with a twist: I was born and raised in a country named the Socialist Republic of Romania which was a Communist dictatorship ever since it was proclaimed (December 30, 1947) until it fell (December 22, 1989). I know from personal experience exactly and precisely what a dictatorship is and looks like, and how a dictator behaves. With all due respect --- and actually very fortunately and very good for them --- not a single any other GMGer currently active can say that, with one possible exception (member pi2000). As such, it is my firm conviction that neither was Donald Trump a dictator nor did he try to become one, and that at no time between January 20, 2017 and January 20, 2020 did the USA have the slightest resemblance to a dictatorship in the making, let alone a full-fledged one.

I'm sorry but I'm not buying this unique perspective of yours.

Also it presupposes the notion that denizens of former Soviet satellite states are fundamentally better prepared for democracy and unfortunately there is not much on the ground evidence for that. Too many of those countries are still relatively weak in that respect.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 11, 2020, 04:44:53 PM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on November 11, 2020, 04:36:52 PM
It's nice to have a dream.

I see the postal worker who initially charged all sorts of post office voter fraud in Erie PA recanted his story and admitted he made the whole thing up.

Of all places in Erie PA?

The town Trump said he would never go to?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on November 11, 2020, 05:01:52 PM
Quote from: Dowder on November 11, 2020, 04:46:48 PM
Stay tuned, Gurn. This election was like no other due to the vote by mail ballots being shipped out everywhere. Clearly a Dem strategy to win.

That Penn St postal worker has denied he recanted and has been suspended without pay for not staying quiet about the power grab. 

Biden may wind up as president but let the process work itself out. I do take heart in the GOP gains in the house and the chance to have 52 senate seats. At the very least the nutty left wing agenda won't come to fruition.

Well, we will just have to see. I have to assume from your statements here that your position is that anyone who is to your left is per definitionem part of the "nutty left wing". Which is interesting, since for the many years I was 'right of center', half the Republican party was left of me, and now, though I haven't moved at all, 3/4 of the Republican party is to my right. It is cool, in its own way, that now I have finally reached the age where I am one of those wicked Lefties again.  :D :D

8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on November 11, 2020, 05:31:06 PM
I found this article interesting. About 2 years ago, I created a fake email address which I trolled through T***pLand so they would start me on their mailing list. It took almost 10 minutes to get my first letter, but they have come in a steady stream, nay, a raging torrent, since then. Over the last week, I have been getting ~20 emails a day. So I did some looking around in news organizations I have some confidence in to find some background about them. [url-https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-trump-fundraising-insigh/donations-under-8k-to-trump-election-defense-instead-go-to-president-rnc-idUSKBN27R309]This article [/url]was in Reuters:

Quote(Reuters) - As President Donald Trump seeks to discredit last week's election with baseless claims of voter fraud, his team has bombarded his supporters with requests for money to help pay for legal challenges to the results: "The Left will try to STEAL this election!" reads one text. But any small-dollar donations from Trump's grassroots donors won't be going to legal expenses at all, according to a Reuters review of the legal language in the solicitations.

A donor would have to give more than $8,000 before any money goes to the "recount account" established to finance election challenges, including recounts and lawsuits over alleged improprieties, the fundraising disclosures show.

The emailed solicitations send supporters to an "Official Election Defense Fund" website that asks them to sign up for recurring donations to "protect the results and keep fighting even after Election Day."

The fine print makes clear most of the money will go to other priorities.

A large portion of the money goes to "Save America," a Trump leadership PAC, or political action committee, set up on Monday, and the Republican National Committee (RNC). Under Federal Election Commission rules, both groups have broad leeway in how they can use the funds.

The Trump campaign, the RNC and Trump's new Save America PAC did not respond to requests for comment.

Leadership PACs such as Save America are often set up by prominent political figures to spend money on other candidates, while also paying for personal expenses, such as travel and hotel stays.

The disclosures would allow Trump and the RNC to channel the donations into other political causes or campaigns, such as the two high-stakes January Senate runoff races in Georgia that could determine control of the Senate and are likely to rank among the most expensive races in U.S. history.

Trump's solicitation website carries a banner headline that says "OFFICIAL ELECTION DEFENSE FUND" and "CONTRIBUTE NOW."

Scrolling down the page would take a donor to the fine print, which shows that donations are split between "Save America," which gets 60% of the money, and the RNC, which gets the other 40%. None of the money flows to Trump's official "recount" committee fund until Trump's Save America share reaches the legal contribution limit of $5,000, according to the disclosures.

That means that, before a dollar goes into the recount fund, Save America would receive $5,000 and the RNC around $3,300. Donations to the recount committee are legally limited to $2,800.

If a Trump donor gave $500, for instance, $300 would go to Trump's Save America PAC, $200 would to the RNC - and nothing would go to his election defense fund.

One Republican political strategist said Trump is misleading supporters who might give small donations to whatever cause he approves.

"It's important to be up front with people - especially those who are digging deep into their pockets to come up with $25," said Michael DuHaime, a former political director at the RNC. "If you tell them it's going for legal fees, well then it should go for legal fees."

If you still haven't figured it out, this is yet another example of the fleecing of America. It is how the man works.

8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: bhodges on November 11, 2020, 06:17:15 PM
Another adult scheduled to arrive at the White House: Ron Klain as Chief of Staff. "His deep, varied experience and capacity to work with people all across the political spectrum is precisely what I need in a White House chief of staff as we confront this moment of crisis and bring our country together again."

https://buildbackbetter.com/press-releases/president-elect-joe-biden-names-ron-klain-as-white-house-chief-of-staff/

--Bruce
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on November 11, 2020, 06:20:38 PM
Quote from: Brewski on November 11, 2020, 06:17:15 PM
Another adult scheduled to arrive at the White House: Ron Klain as Chief of Staff. "His deep, varied experience and capacity to work with people all across the political spectrum is precisely what I need in a White House chief of staff as we confront this moment of crisis and bring our country together again."

https://buildbackbetter.com/press-releases/president-elect-joe-biden-names-ron-klain-as-white-house-chief-of-staff/

--Bruce
He has pandemic experience, having headed up Obama's Ebola team.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 11, 2020, 06:44:50 PM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on November 11, 2020, 05:31:06 PM
I found this article interesting. About 2 years ago, I created a fake email address which I trolled through T***pLand so they would start me on their mailing list. It took almost 10 minutes to get my first letter, but they have come in a steady stream, nay, a raging torrent, since then. Over the last week, I have been getting ~20 emails a day. So I did some looking around in news organizations I have some confidence in to find some background about them. [url-https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-trump-fundraising-insigh/donations-under-8k-to-trump-election-defense-instead-go-to-president-rnc-idUSKBN27R309]This article [/url]was in Reuters:

If you still haven't figured it out, this is yet another example of the fleecing of America. It is how the man works.

8)

Yep. I guess some embrace the delusion.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 11, 2020, 11:53:44 PM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on November 11, 2020, 05:31:06 PM
I found this article interesting. About 2 years ago, I created a fake email address which I trolled through T***pLand so they would start me on their mailing list. It took almost 10 minutes to get my first letter, but they have come in a steady stream, nay, a raging torrent, since then.

That's heroic.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 12, 2020, 12:29:53 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on November 11, 2020, 02:18:15 PM
I do feel that I'm a centrist in that I'm not onboard with the extremism of both parties (i. e. the far right/left).

The left wing of the Dems is not that left really. They just look far left because the Overton Window has moved so right. Progressives have very sane and normal policies.

They want to save the planet while give people jobs with Green new deal. Are you not onboard saving the planet and giving people jobs?
They want to give everyone healthcare like every other developped country does. Are you not onboad?

Centrists are actually right-winger and the "right"- Biden is a right-winger. He does not believe everyone should have healthcare. That's RADICAL and VERY right-wing.

You should re-evaluate you opinions. Why do you have them? Corporate media?
Or don't do anything. What do I care. It's not my country we are talking about.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on November 12, 2020, 01:02:39 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on November 11, 2020, 02:18:15 PM
It's certainly discerning to say the least. Just for the record, I'm not a Republican or Democrat, but I do feel that I'm a centrist in that I'm not onboard with the extremism of both parties (i. e. the far right/left).

Have to agree with 71 on this, ideologically the Democratic Party is at most center-left extending to center-right and even right wing (Chris Coons?).  I don't think even AOC believes the proletariat should seize the means of production.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Handelian on November 12, 2020, 01:15:03 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 11, 2020, 11:42:01 AM
Seriously now, I am a disinterested third party from another country (I borrow this apt phrase from another poster) --- with a twist: I was born and raised in a country named the Socialist Republic of Romania which was a Communist dictatorship ever since it was proclaimed (December 30, 1947) until it fell (December 22, 1989). I know from personal experience exactly and precisely what a dictatorship is and looks like, and how a dictator behaves. With all due respect --- and actually very fortunately and very good for them --- not a single any other GMGer currently active can say that, with one possible exception (member pi2000). As such, it is my firm conviction that neither was Donald Trump a dictator nor did he try to become one, and that at no time between January 20, 2017 and January 20, 2020 did the USA have the slightest resemblance to a dictatorship in the making, let alone a full-fledged one.

Why Todd's post was considered trolling is beyon me, too. Maybe it was a misunderstanding.

Sorry mate, but you won't get any change out of those who are convinced that Trump was a dictator, even though any examination of his term of office shows how ludicrous such a charge is. The fact that he is uncouth and vulgar does not make a man a dictator, as he had the American constitution to contend with. The same ridiculous charge was levelled against our prime minister when he refused to answer the pointless and tiresome question from a tiresome and overpaid journalist. Just that these labels are very convenient and impress people of shallow thinking. Those of us who actually know some history about Romania will know the terrors of the regime there were simply horrific and far removed form anything most Americans could dream about. As one who has been to countries rules by dictatorships I can say the same. Say you don't like Trump by all means but please be more informed with your labels.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 12, 2020, 01:18:33 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 12, 2020, 12:29:53 AM
Biden is a right-winger. He does not believe everyone should have healthcare. That's RADICAL and VERY right-wing.

You should re-evaluate you opinions. Why do you have them? Corporate media?
Or don't do anything. What do I care. It's not my country we are talking about.

This is sooo previous USA thread.

I agree with you about the Overton window, but why keep saying this?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 12, 2020, 01:32:57 AM
Quote from: Handelian on November 12, 2020, 01:15:03 AM
Sorry mate, but you won't get any change out of those who are convinced that Trump was a dictator, even though any examination of his term of office shows how ludicrous such a charge is.

I think people are saying Trump is trying to be a dictator and his party is not very good at stopping him.

Re "term of office": Trump has been musing publicly about a third or even fourth term for years. Just as he's now talking about a 2nd term even though the public has denied him this.

All these performative musings are part of his testing the waters for a power takeover, which most likely would fail anyway because he's failure personified.

However, if you're the Head of State, the things you say matter a lot (which is why in normal cases they don't say a lot).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 12, 2020, 01:44:35 AM
The NYTimes about Mike Pence:

"Mr. Pence's allies expect him to return to Indiana and make a living giving paid speeches and potentially writing a book. It will be the first time in a long time that Mr. Pence will live as a private citizen — he moved from the governor's mansion in Indiana to temporary housing in Washington during the presidential transition four years ago to the Naval Observatory. He currently does not own a house."

I can't imagine the crazy fan scenes if Pence (also called "Pounds" by Trump) were to give speeches, paid or not.

It's somehow strangely characteristic that the Pences have been living in public housing for like, aeons, and don't own their own home.

Just as he does not want to meet or talk with women other than his wife (aka "Mother") I expect he thinks being in one's own home is an incitement to ungodly thoughts. It's cheaper as well, just like not having lunch with a woman person.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Sterna on November 12, 2020, 01:53:34 AM
Quote from: Herman on November 12, 2020, 01:18:33 AM
This is sooo previous USA thread.

You must be joking.

All bs here is sooo previous USA thread(s).

I did check Joe Biden on Presto Classical. Couldn't find anything.

(https://i.imgur.com/R5DWlk5.jpg)

He's not going to do a duetto disc with Donald Trump?

Pity.

(https://i.imgur.com/68axgqP.jpg)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 12, 2020, 02:33:10 AM
Quote from: Daverz on November 12, 2020, 01:02:39 AM
Have to agree with 71 on this,

Good for you!  ;)

Quote from: Daverz on November 12, 2020, 01:02:39 AMideologically the Democratic Party is at most center-left extending to center-right and even right wing (Chris Coons?).  I don't think even AOC believes the proletariat should seize the means of production.

Yep. AOC is clear about what she advocates. People should listen to her instead of Ben Shapiro about what she is advocating. Oligarchs don't pay Ben Shapiro to be factually correct about AOC, but to fearmonger.

Quote from: Herman on November 12, 2020, 01:18:33 AM
This is sooo previous USA thread.

I agree with you about the Overton window, but why keep saying this?

Because people seem to keep forgetting  the Overton window and where it is.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 12, 2020, 04:18:01 AM
Quote from: Handelian on November 12, 2020, 02:53:21 AM
For goodness sake, every president of the United States I have ever seen has tried to be a dictator in the sense that they have tried to get their policies through. That is what presidents do. The reason they are not dictators is the Constitution of the United States which prevents that.I know Trump is not helping himself by the way he acts but all these conspiracy theories to me are ludicrous. He has every right to challenge the result according to the Constitution and the legal process will take its course. In the same way as the Democrats challenged the result of the 2016 election

Trying to get one's policies through doesn't make one a would be dictator.

Also, I don't think any US American could write or say the above.

There are a lot of non-Americans with very strong feelings or ideas about this, and I'm not sure this always helps.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 12, 2020, 05:55:39 AM
I've seen and heard various discussions as to what Pres. Trump's life might be like post-January 20th.  Here are some interesting things to ponder:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-54875343

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: bhodges on November 12, 2020, 05:56:37 AM
Reminder: Please keep it civil, folks. We are moderating this thread more closely than in the past, and don't have patience for back-and-forth insults.

Thank you.

--Bruce
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Zeus on November 12, 2020, 06:41:57 AM
Hopefully, with Trump on his way out of office, and once the constant stream of lying dies down, we can take a look at some painful facts.

Like this one: the US health care system kinda sucks.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d6/Life_expectancy_vs_healthcare_spending.jpg)

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 12, 2020, 07:14:16 AM
     GOP leaders' embrace of Trump's refusal to concede fits pattern of rising authoritarianism, data shows (https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/11/12/republican-party-trump-authoritarian-data/)

     It's now acceptable among some Repubs to express anti-democratic views. This puts Repubs in the position of competing in elections they don't regard as authentic. Elections that are a sham if they lose are a sham, period. They are not inexplicably genuine if the "right" side wins. By what process could such a thing happen?

     You are in a fog of belief if you choose to abandon objective criteria for partisan reasons. Repubs are in the position of appealing to election officials of their own party to "admit" that they have run crooked elections. Since no evidence is offered it's belief all the way down.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Que on November 12, 2020, 07:38:21 AM
Quote from: Zeus on November 12, 2020, 06:41:57 AM
Hopefully, with Trump on his way out of office, and once the constant stream of lying dies down, we can take a look at some painful facts.

Like this one: the US health care system kinda sucks.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d6/Life_expectancy_vs_healthcare_spending.jpg)

Right. The most expensive and the least efficiënt amongst developed nations - check...

But you know that many in the US think that the US is so "unique" (exceptional) that a health care system with a universal/collective element in it is "not suitable". The best way of dealing with this kind of comparative statistics is to claim they do not apply to you. (Same with guns.... ) Besides, good and generally accessible and affordable health care reeks of socialism and is bad for share holders of insurance and pharmaceutical companies.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 12, 2020, 07:39:28 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 12, 2020, 07:14:16 AM
     GOP leaders' embrace of Trump's refusal to concede fits pattern of rising authoritarianism, data shows (https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/11/12/republican-party-trump-authoritarian-data/)

     It's now acceptable among some Repubs to express anti-democratic views. This puts Repubs in the position of competing in elections they don't regard as authentic. Elections that are a sham if they lose are a sham, period. They are not inexplicably genuine if the "right" side wins. By what process could such a thing happen?

     You are in a fog of belief if you choose to abandon objective criteria for partisan reasons. Repubs are in the position of appealing to election officials of their own party to "admit" that they have run crooked elections. Since no evidence is offered it's belief all the way down.

Ah, the right-wing disinformation ecosystem....
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 12, 2020, 07:59:34 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 12, 2020, 07:39:28 AM
Ah, the right-wing disinformation ecosystem....

     It's not just the Repubs who can't control their subjects. Putin isn't sure what instructions to issue. Q has gone dark, and his alter ego says he wants to spend more time with whatever people spend more time with. People who are not thinky are not knowing what to think. There's no muscle memory to draw on.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on November 12, 2020, 08:17:01 AM
Quote from: Handelian on November 12, 2020, 01:15:03 AM
Sorry mate, but you won't get any change out of those who are convinced that Trump was a dictator, even though any examination of his term of office shows how ludicrous such a charge is. The fact that he is uncouth and vulgar does not make a man a dictator, as he had the American constitution to contend with. The same ridiculous charge was levelled against our prime minister when he refused to answer the pointless and tiresome question from a tiresome and overpaid journalist. Just that these labels are very convenient and impress people of shallow thinking. Those of us who actually know some history about Romania will know the terrors of the regime there were simply horrific and far removed form anything most Americans could dream about. As one who has been to countries rules by dictatorships I can say the same. Say you don't like Trump by all means but please be more informed with your labels.

Who said Trump was a dictator? Anyone we know? Anyone we've heard of?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 12, 2020, 08:36:59 AM
Quote from: Que on November 12, 2020, 07:38:21 AM
But you know that many in the US think that the US is so "unique" (exceptional) that a health care system with a universal/collective element in it is "not suitable". The best way of dealing with this kind of comparative statistics is to claim they do not apply to you. (Same with guns.... ) Besides, good and generally accessible and affordable health care reeks of socialism and is bad for share holders of insurance and pharmaceutical companies.

What's "unique" with the US is the fact how the politicians (well, almost all of them anyway) serve the top 1 % instead of regular people, how corrupt the system is. That's the difference and the reason why American healthcare system is so different. Nothing else makes the US "not suitable." The main purpose of the US healthcare system is not to give people healthcare, but to maximize the profits for insurance and drug companies. If you look at the curves, the US is among the other countries up until late 70's and after that starts to go it's own way. Late 70's was when corruption was effectively made legal (Buckley v. Valeo: Money = $peech). If other countries are doing "socialism" and the US is doing "capitalism" we can easily see how "socialism" is superior to "capitalism" when it comes to healthcare. Capitalism is superior in many other things, but not here. Rational people look at empirical evidence. Single payer healthcare can have a lot of capitalism in it. The service providers can be private as they are in France or Canada for example. They important thing is public funding of those services ( =socialism according to right-wing fearmongers, but is actually social democracy). That's where the US system fails miserably because of utter corruption.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 12, 2020, 08:38:39 AM
David French: "The wave of initial vote fraud rumors has been decisively debunked, so now the president retreats to the farthest fringes of conspiracy theory, to the software vote fairy that magically changes the count."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Zeus on November 12, 2020, 08:42:50 AM
The US is pursuing "monopolism".

Pros: high profits, high asset prices, businesses catering to the top 10% to 20% are booming.

Cons: rising income and wealth inequality, stagnating industries, declining global competitiveness, declining living standards for the majority.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on November 12, 2020, 08:44:35 AM
Quote from: Herman on November 11, 2020, 11:53:44 PM
That's heroic.

Beyond which, it was eye-opening. If you only read the mainstream media, you saw just the tip of the BS iceberg. :D

8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Que on November 12, 2020, 08:46:26 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 12, 2020, 08:36:59 AM
That's where the US system fails miserably because of utter corruption.

I don't see any evidence of that level of corruption in the USA. I however do see a (traditionally) high level of distrust in government and an unwillingness to pay taxes. After all, US independence was not fought over the lofty ideals in the US Constitution, but over taxes to the British Crown.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Zeus on November 12, 2020, 08:48:43 AM
Once again the GOP ran up the federal deficit like drunken sailors; once again it falls on the Dems to restore fiscal sobriety.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 12, 2020, 08:53:49 AM
Quote from: Zeus on November 12, 2020, 06:41:57 AMLike this one: the US health care system kinda sucks.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d6/Life_expectancy_vs_healthcare_spending.jpg)

I just watched the Sandra Bullock movie "The Net" from 1995 on Blu-ray and in one scene it has demonstrators on street. One of the big signs had the test: "Healthcare is a human right, not a priviledge". It's now 25 years after the movie and that message is as relevant as ever, in fact more relevant because healthcare prices have been going up fast.

:P
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 12, 2020, 08:56:05 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on November 12, 2020, 08:17:01 AM
Who said Trump was a dictator? Anyone we know? Anyone we've heard of?

     Even if we gave him maximum credit for effort, Trump isn't a dictator. He's simply not up to it. To be fair, it would be difficult for anyone. Democratic states are designed to be deep enough to withstand assault by autocrats. It's not just a matter of form, it's how form and practice are fused. As an economist might say, the Constitution in the US is largely a "post facto identity", a compact to formalize a path already taken.

Quote from: Que on November 12, 2020, 08:46:26 AM
I don't see any evidence of that level of corruption in the USA. I however do see a (traditionally) high level of distrust in government and an unwillingness to pay taxes. After all, US independence was not fought over the lofty ideals in the US Constitution, but over taxes to the British Crown.

     I see very little unwillingness to pay taxes. It's something people complain about. Even I do that, though not about what I pay. I pay more when my income goes up, less when it goes down. Maybe I'd get angry if it was the reverse.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 12, 2020, 08:59:11 AM
A dictator wannabe is not the same as a dictator! However, a dictator wannabe may someday become a real dictator and is therefor dangerous.

Quote from: Zeus on November 12, 2020, 08:48:43 AM
Once again the GOP ran up the federal deficit like drunken sailors; once again it falls on the Dems to restore fiscal sobriety.

Cenk Uygur of TYT used to be a Republican, but in mid 90's realized Republicans are lying when saying they are deficit hawks and started to question the whole Republican ideology. He found out it's all complete bs and became a leftist.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 12, 2020, 09:06:37 AM
It will soon be fashionable, again, to be a deficit hawk.  Can't wait.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 12, 2020, 09:11:49 AM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on November 12, 2020, 08:44:35 AM
Beyond which, it was eye-opening. If you only read the mainstream media, you saw just the tip of the BS iceberg. :D

8)

I admit ... that was my suspicion.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 12, 2020, 09:16:53 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 12, 2020, 08:59:11 AM

Cenk Uygur of TYT used to be a Republican, but in mid 90's realized Republicans are lying when saying they are deficit hawks and started to question the whole Republican ideology. He found out it's all complete bs and became a leftist.

     Every time I read a story like this I wonder why so few people claim to be religious in these troubled times.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on November 12, 2020, 09:35:03 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 12, 2020, 09:16:53 AM
     Every time I read a story like this I wonder why so few people claim to be religious in these troubled times.

Well, some do:

Paula White, associated with #45 to a surprising degree, was pretty open about it just the other day, and it's an amazing clip that went viral:
https://twitter.com/JamesOlympics/status/1324344754465890304
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paula_White)

#45 afficionados praying outside election countings:
https://twitter.com/redcachenet/status/1324625963800432641

But others however, like Kenneth Copeland, show their (own) sense of humour. Another amazing clip.
https://twitter.com/RightWingWatch/status/1325513157926932480
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_Copeland)




Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on November 12, 2020, 09:41:39 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 12, 2020, 08:56:05 AM
         I see very little unwillingness to pay taxes. It's something people complain about. Even I do that, though not about what I pay. I pay more when my income goes up, less when it goes down. Maybe I'd get angry if it was the reverse.

This jibes well with my own observations and sentiments. I don't mind paying taxes, they are needed to accomplish so many of the basic necessities, if for no other reason. I am not going to manufacture my own water and sewage systems, for example.

But like most other private citizens, we want to pay only our fair share, and we want everyone else to also pay their fair share. That's what the resistance comes from. If I make $40k and pay my taxes, and you make 2 billion and end up paying less than I do, then yes, I'm pretty f**king pissed. Anyone who wasn't would be some sort of saint, or else deficient on some front.

8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on November 12, 2020, 09:53:20 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 12, 2020, 08:46:59 AM
Yes.

Sorry, neither of those quotations qualify. in the first instance the term is part of a fanciful metaphorical characterization of Trump's last days in office, the second statement said dictator wannabe. Try again.   
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 12, 2020, 10:05:55 AM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on November 12, 2020, 09:41:39 AM
This jibes well with my own observations and sentiments. I don't mind paying taxes, they are needed to accomplish so many of the basic necessities, if for no other reason. I am not going to manufacture my own water and sewage systems, for example.

But like most other private citizens, we want to pay only our fair share, and we want everyone else to also pay their fair share. That's what the resistance comes from. If I make $40k and pay my taxes, and you make 2 billion and end up paying less than I do, then yes, I'm pretty f**king pissed...
+1
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 12, 2020, 10:21:51 AM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on November 12, 2020, 09:41:39 AM


But like most other private citizens, we want to pay only our fair share, and we want everyone else to also pay their fair share. That's what the resistance comes from. If I make $40k and pay my taxes, and you make 2 billion and end up paying less than I do, then yes, I'm pretty f**king pissed. Anyone who wasn't would be some sort of saint, or else deficient on some front.

8)

     I'm not immune to the fairness argument. I just see it as secondary to my main concern, which is the synergy between efforts to raise income at lower levels and the ability of the economy to grow robustly. A growth policy will raise low incomes, an income policy will raise growth. Tax policy is one lever, spending the other. I observe we get our useful ideas of what's fair from the realization of how things work.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: vandermolen on November 12, 2020, 10:27:52 AM
Quote from: Brewski on November 10, 2020, 03:54:22 PM
It's going to provide comedians, writers, and filmmakers with comedy for years. Exhibit A: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAyh2xPrFvo&fbclid

--Bruce

V. funny!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on November 12, 2020, 10:36:07 AM
Quote from: Zeus on November 12, 2020, 06:41:57 AM
Hopefully, with Trump on his way out of office, and once the constant stream of lying dies down, we can take a look at some painful facts.

Like this one: the US health care system kinda sucks.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d6/Life_expectancy_vs_healthcare_spending.jpg)

Is this total spending or only govt spending?
If the healthcare spending decreases in a subsequent year, does the mark still proceed rightward or retreat leftward?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: vandermolen on November 12, 2020, 10:37:25 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on November 11, 2020, 06:50:14 AM
As I was telling Dave (SonicMan) in the 'Missing Members' thread, it's scary to think how much more damage Trump can do since he's still in office and can't be ousted legally until January.

Yes, as an outsider surely this is an argument for not having such a long gap between the election itself and the new President being sworn in. Personally I admire the way that Biden is dealing with it by, apparently, just getting on with the job and good for George W. for referring to Trump as the 'former President' and congratulating Biden.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 12, 2020, 10:39:40 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on November 12, 2020, 10:37:25 AM
Yes, as an outsider surely this is an argument for not having such a long gap between the election itself and the new President being sworn in. Personally I admire the way that Biden is dealing with it by, apparently, just getting on with the job and good for George W. for referring to Trump as the 'former President' and congratulating Biden.
Yes, I was pleased to see George W. doing the correct, civil, kind and smart thing to do; now if that would just get through the head of our current president!  ::)

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: bhodges on November 12, 2020, 10:43:57 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on November 12, 2020, 10:27:52 AM
V. funny!

;D

Like many (I suspect), I have already found a photo of that Four Seasons Total Landscaping garage door, to use as a virtual Zoom background.

--Bruce
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 12, 2020, 10:51:57 AM
Quote from: Brewski on November 12, 2020, 10:43:57 AM
;D

Like many (I suspect), I have already found a photo of that Four Seasons Total Landscaping garage door, to use as a virtual Zoom background.

--Bruce
:laugh:  I couldn't believe that story when I first heard it; I thought "This has got to be a joke!"  At least the business is making some money off of it.  ;D

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/four-seasons-total-landscaping-enjoying-163131224.html
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 12, 2020, 11:05:00 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on November 12, 2020, 10:37:25 AMYes, as an outsider surely this is an argument for not having such a long gap between the election itself and the new President being sworn in.

It was already moved up to January from March in the 30s.  We just need another Constitutional Amendment to move it up any further.  As it stands, it could not be earlier than the first day of the first session of a new Congress since under certain circumstances Congress would have to choose the president.  There is a lower probability of this being changed than the Electoral College being abolished.


Quote from: Florestan on November 12, 2020, 10:54:53 AMIt only took me five minutes, including the copypaste and inserting the quote brackets.

It is a bit interesting how people who were previously quite certain that Trump would steal the election - a definitively dictatorial action - now never believed such things.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on November 12, 2020, 11:05:48 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 12, 2020, 10:21:51 AM
     I'm not immune to the fairness argument. I just see it as secondary to my main concern, which is the synergy between efforts to raise income at lower levels and the ability of the economy to grow robustly. A growth policy will raise low incomes, an income policy will raise growth. Tax policy is one lever, spending the other. I observe we get our useful ideas of what's fair from the realization of how things work.

Whilst that is all true, the question at hand was that a non-American was saying that he felt he could see that Americans don't want to pay taxes. The fairness argument is a lot more on point than some esoteric income leveling policy, which in 69 years on this planet, I have yet to see brought forward by anyone in everyday life. The 2 issues are:

No one I have spoken to (amazingly, really) has ever said a word about income leveling. Not that they shouldn't, don't get me wrong, but it doesn't contribute substantially to the reluctance to pay taxes expressed by some. Just sayin'...

8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 12, 2020, 11:08:18 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 12, 2020, 11:05:00 AM
It is a bit interesting how people who were previously quite certain that Trump would steal the election - a definitively dictatorial action - now never believed such things.

Btw, any news yet of those storm troops which were ready to wreak havoc on the Election Day by intimidating voters and quite possibly even shooting some of them?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Que on November 12, 2020, 11:09:09 AM
Reminder: discussion here is supposed to be on the topic and not about each other.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 12, 2020, 11:10:39 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 12, 2020, 11:08:18 AM
Btw, any news yet of those storm troops which were ready to wreak havoc on the Election Day by intimidating voters and quite possibly even shooting some of them?


Didn't you hear, no one actually voted.  Everyone was cowed into staying home by the huge, roving bands of thugs dead set on stopping the vote.  The election was fake.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on November 12, 2020, 11:12:25 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 12, 2020, 11:08:18 AM
Btw, any news yet of those storm troops which were ready to wreak havoc on the Election Day by intimidating voters and quite possibly even shooting some of them?

You say that as though it was something that the liberals made up, when in fact T***p himself said, several times at his Nuremberg rallies, that he wanted that to happen. Clearly no one took him seriously enough that they didn't come in and help vote him out of office.

8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 12, 2020, 11:15:57 AM
Mona Charen: "The day after the firing of the secretary of defense who resisted the use of troops against peaceful American protesters is probably not a great time for the secretary of state to joke about a transition to a "second Trump administration." If he was in fact joking. Welcome to what the Republican party is in 2020—a threat to democratic order.

I've had conversations in the past few days with people who disliked Trump enough to pull the lever for Biden but still believe that the Republican party itself is sound and will snap back to normal now that Trump is defeated.

I'd like to believe that, but the auguries are not good so far. The party's leaders have closed ranks around Trump, repeating the lies and conspiracies he's spinning about a stolen election. They are laying the predicate for the next four years—the stab in the back. Trump didn't lose, he was robbed. Biden is not the president, he's the usurper.

You really couldn't have asked for a more open-handed Democrat than Joe Biden. He has made every effort to soothe the bitterness of our politics and attempted to unify the country. Someone on CNN said he had "slammed" Trump for failing to concede, but that's wrong. He said it was "embarrassing" and wouldn't burnish Trump's legacy—which is about the mildest way to describe what Trump is doing."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on November 12, 2020, 11:16:39 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 12, 2020, 11:10:39 AM

Didn't you hear, no one actually voted.  Everyone was cowed into staying home by the huge, roving bands of thugs dead set on stopping the vote.  The election was fake.

I personally received this email yesterday, directly from Lara T***p herself.
QuoteThis Election isn't over yet and it's imperative that we keep FIGHTING for every single LEGAL vote to be counted.

President Trump is putting together an exclusive group of his most reliable supporters, the Election Defense Task Force, and he needs YOU on the team to FIGHT BACK against the blatant voter fraud.

We cannot allow the Radical Left to subvert our Elections, which is why it's so CRITICAL that you step up right now.

So you are probably right, Todd, the election WAS fake!  :o :o :o 

She wants me to send them my life savings. You think I should go ahead and do that? 
Signed: Dazed and Confused  ::)

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 12, 2020, 11:17:59 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 12, 2020, 11:08:18 AM
Btw, any news yet of those storm troops which were ready to wreak havoc on the Election Day by intimidating voters and quite possibly even shooting some of them?

There were in fact incidents of voter intimidation. Are you sure you want to try to laugh it off?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 12, 2020, 11:20:56 AM

     Biden Can't Stop America's Democratic Decline (https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:H2pchZYfk9YJ:https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/11/12/biden-cant-stop-americas-democratic-decline/+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-b-1-d)

A few years ago I developed a moderately cheering theory about the effects of four years of U.S. President Donald Trump. The thought came to me while I was covering the French presidential elections in 2017. Very few French voters seemed to be attracted to Emmanuel Macron's Anglo-American brand of liberalism, but they voted for him in overwhelming numbers against Marine Le Pen because they felt called to defend so-called republican values against her populist nativism. The French had a collective memory of their own brush with fascism during the Vichy era and the 1930s. So, too, the Spanish, who kept their own right wing firmly in check. Perhaps, I thought, Americans' own problem was historical complacency; if so, Trump could provide a kind of homeopathic remedy which would inoculate them against the full-blown disease of authoritarianism without making them gravely ill.

I was wrong. The democratic catharsis that I hoped this election would produce did not happen and is not happening. I need not recite the evidence, as so many others have, including Foreign Policy's editor, Jonathan Tepperman. It is enough to say that my medical metaphor got it backward: Trump exploited a preexisting condition of contempt for democratic norms and then made it vastly worse.


     The thesis is that neither party will be able to overcome the other until the system collapses and MechaTrump rules over the rubble.

Quote from: Gurn Blanston on November 12, 2020, 11:12:25 AM
You say that as though it was something that the liberals made up, when in fact T***p himself said, several times at his Nuremberg rallies, that he wanted that to happen. Clearly no one took him seriously enough that they didn't come in and help vote him out of office.

8)

     Trump didn't succeed so he didn't try, or something like that, or stuff.

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 12, 2020, 11:21:34 AM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on November 12, 2020, 11:16:39 AMShe wants me to send them my life savings. You think I should go ahead and do that? 


No, absolutely not.  You should go ahead and send it to me, and I will spend it judiciously on good causes.  I will send you a PM with my bank account info.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 12, 2020, 11:25:54 AM

     We should agree on crediting Trump with his efforts. If anyone thought Trump would succeed in stealing an election by accusing the other side of stealing it, they have been proved wrong by events, usually the best proof. It's not a new thing that Trump doesn't get what he wants most of the time. Life is very unfair to him.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on November 12, 2020, 11:26:19 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 12, 2020, 11:21:34 AM

No, absolutely not.  You should go ahead and send it to me, and I will spend it judiciously on good causes.  I will send you a PM with my bank account info.

:D

8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: vandermolen on November 12, 2020, 11:26:46 AM
Quote from: Brewski on November 12, 2020, 10:43:57 AM
;D

Like many (I suspect), I have already found a photo of that Four Seasons Total Landscaping garage door, to use as a virtual Zoom background.

--Bruce

Brilliant!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: vandermolen on November 12, 2020, 11:30:24 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 12, 2020, 11:05:00 AM
It was already moved up to January from March in the 30s.  We just need another Constitutional Amendment to move it up any further.  As it stands, it could not be earlier than the first day of the first session of a new Congress since under certain circumstances Congress would have to choose the president.  There is a lower probability of this being changed than the Electoral College being abolished.
Thanks for the explanation re. dates. I realise that it's not that straightforward.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 12, 2020, 11:33:50 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 12, 2020, 11:25:54 AM
     We should agree on crediting Trump with his efforts. If anyone thought Trump would succeed in stealing an election by accusing the other side of stealing it, they have been proved wrong by events, usually the best proof. It's not a new thing that Trump doesn't get what he wants most of the time. Life is very unfair to him.

By a 7-million margin, the voters want President Biden, and not to give a second term to the wankmaggot dotard, but the election was not the repudiation of Trumpism for which decent Americans hoped.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 12, 2020, 11:35:30 AM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on November 12, 2020, 11:05:48 AM
Whilst that is all true, the question at hand was that a non-American was saying that he felt he could see that Americans don't want to pay taxes. The fairness argument is a lot more on point than some esoteric income leveling policy, which in 69 years on this planet, I have yet to see brought forward by anyone in everyday life. The 2 issues are:

  • Fairness
  • Irresponsible spending by the government

No one I have spoken to (amazingly, really) has ever said a word about income leveling. Not that they shouldn't, don't get me wrong, but it doesn't contribute substantially to the reluctance to pay taxes expressed by some. Just sayin'...

8)

     No, I don't expect people to understand how taxing and spending levels income as esoterically as I do. There's no danger of that. It would be good if people understood just a little that what people want in terms of fairness, when it's done, does what I describe, not in a future world but in this one. IOW to the degree that a policy, the present one or a future one, satisfies ideas of fairness it will be because it does something along the lines I describe, growing incomes and the economy.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on November 12, 2020, 11:39:07 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 12, 2020, 11:20:56 AM
     Biden Can't Stop America's Democratic Decline (https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:H2pchZYfk9YJ:https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/11/12/biden-cant-stop-americas-democratic-decline/+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-b-1-d)

"[...] if one half of the country continues to regard democratic processes as a sinister means for empowering the other half."

Um, no, only one party regards democratic processes as sinister.  (Sorry to pull out one sentence from a long article, but that one just bugged me.)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 12, 2020, 11:50:50 AM
Quote from: Daverz on November 12, 2020, 11:39:07 AM
"[...] if one half of the country continues to regard democratic processes as a sinister means for empowering the other half."

Um, no, only one party regards democratic processes as sinister.  (Sorry to pull out one sentence from a long article, but that one just bugged me.)

     It doesn't say both halves have to think the same way. It's a belief one half has about the other. It could be true that both halves are symmetrical in believing the worst about each other, but it's not a necessary condition.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 12, 2020, 11:53:43 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 12, 2020, 11:50:50 AM
     It doesn't say both halves have to think the same way. It's a belief one half has about the other. It could be true that both halves are symmetrical in believing the worst about each other, but it's not a necessary condition.

I do not think it is about any such symmetry.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on November 12, 2020, 12:02:23 PM
Quote from: vandermolen on November 12, 2020, 10:37:25 AM
Yes, as an outsider surely this is an argument for not having such a long gap between the election itself and the new President being sworn in. Personally I admire the way that Biden is dealing with it by, apparently, just getting on with the job and good for George W. for referring to Trump as the 'former President' and congratulating Biden.

Well, it's obvious that Biden won the election, I mean it's beyond absurd at this juncture that former president Trump is acting exactly like how he described the Democrats were acting in 2016. When he signed up for the job, there was always the possibility of losing re-election, that's just the way it goes. He's upset that the votes didn't go his way, but what he has failed to do is thank all the people who actually supported him during his campaign and, quite frankly, I don't think he gives a damn about them and, thankfully, it shows. He has all the markings of a lame duck and will have to accept the reality that he's no long commander-in-chief.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on November 12, 2020, 12:11:40 PM
Quote from: drogulus on November 12, 2020, 11:50:50 AM
     It doesn't say both halves have to think the same way. It's a belief one half has about the other. It could be true that both halves are symmetrical in believing the worst about each other, but it's not a necessary condition.

Ah, yeah, sorry, reading comprehension fail there.  I'm glad you guys caught it.  ;)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Zeus on November 12, 2020, 01:03:35 PM
Quote from: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on November 12, 2020, 10:36:07 AM
Is this total spending or only govt spending?
If the healthcare spending decreases in a subsequent year, does the mark still proceed rightward or retreat leftward?

That's gotta be total health care spending.  And, since time is not given its own axis, any line could move backwards in any given year.  Interestingly, most lines progress upward and to the right fairly smoothly from year to year.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 12, 2020, 02:05:56 PM

     The Pope just congratulated Biden for stealing the election.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 12, 2020, 04:22:24 PM
doesn't sound very papal, somehow.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 12, 2020, 05:36:16 PM

     As Trump stews over election, he mostly ignores the public duties of the presidency (https://www.washingtonpost.com/)

     Excuse please, I am new here, what is public duty of your President? I only know golf and tweet.

It was Biden who offered the first public condolences to the families of the service members who died in Egypt. "I join all Americans in honoring their sacrifice, as I keep their loved ones in my prayers," he wrote on Twitter in the early afternoon Thursday.

By that time, Trump had issued nearly four dozen critical tweets and retweets about the election results and Fox News, including a baseless conspiracy theory from a far-right television network that alleged votes had been improperly tallied in Pennsylvania. He also found time to thank actor Scott Baio for posting a photo of a craft store's candle display, which had been arranged to spell out, "Trump is still your president."

"Thank you Scott, and stay tuned. You are terrific!" Trump wrote.


     I will stay tuned, too. This is a wonderful country.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: flyingdutchman on November 12, 2020, 08:13:27 PM
Donald lost. Good for the United States and the world.

Now begins Joe's effort to work with a Senate that will hopefully be 50-50, but I don't expect it to turn that way. That said, I just sent money to Ossoff and Warnock with hopes they can pull it off.

No doubt, the Dems need to find new leadership in the House. Time for Nancy to step back.

In the end, I point you to loser.com (http://loser.com)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: flyingdutchman on November 12, 2020, 08:19:35 PM
Quote from: Dowder on November 11, 2020, 04:46:48 PM
Stay tuned, Gurn. This election was like no other due to the vote by mail ballots being shipped out everywhere. Clearly a Dem strategy to win.

That Penn St postal worker has denied he recanted and has been suspended without pay for not staying quiet about the power grab. 

Biden may wind up as president but let the process work itself out. I do take heart in the GOP gains in the house and the chance to have 52 senate seats. At the very least the nutty left wing agenda won't come to fruition.

When January 5 comes and the vote is taken, don't be surprised if the Dems pull it out. Believe me, black and brown votes, along with progressive voters like me won't be voting red.  Atlanta is coming out in force for the Dems.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: flyingdutchman on November 12, 2020, 08:23:13 PM
When it does come to governance, I think Joe will outmaneuver McConnell and focus on those things that can bring people together and put Moscow Mitch into a corner. In the end, Mitch will look like the power hog that he is and Joe and the Dems will look like the saviors of our democracy that they are. After all, it isn't hard to bring back a sense of sanity when the inmates (Donald Trump and his sycophants) have been running the asylum.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 12, 2020, 10:37:56 PM
Quote from: flyingdutchman on November 12, 2020, 08:23:13 PM
When it does come to governance, I think Joe will outmaneuver McConnell and focus on those things that can bring people together and put Moscow Mitch into a corner. In the end, Mitch will look like the power hog that he is and Joe and the Dems will look like the saviors of our democracy that they are. After all, it isn't hard to bring back a sense of sanity when the inmates (Donald Trump and his sycophants) have been running the asylum.

I'm not that optimistic.

If the Rs keep the Senate majority they will obstruct all legislation.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 13, 2020, 02:07:53 AM
Quote from: Herman on November 12, 2020, 10:37:56 PM
If the Rs keep the Senate majority they will obstruct all legislation.

No they won't.

They are happy to advance Republican legislation. Only if the Dems try to do something RADICAL/SOCIALIST such as give more people healthcare would they need to obstruct obviously.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on November 13, 2020, 02:22:07 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 13, 2020, 02:07:53 AM
No they won't.

They are happy to advance Republican legislation. Only if the Dems try to do something RADICAL/SOCIALIST such as give more people healthcare would they need to obstruct obviously.

I can't imagine any agreement on any consequential legislation with McConnell in charge. 

Here's a roundup of articles on things that Biden can do without a Democratic Senate:

https://prospect.org/day-one-agenda/election-executive-actions-democratic-presidency/

Discussion with the author, David Dayen:

https://www.youtube.com/v/4WWRF3skZfQ?t=1380
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 13, 2020, 02:25:55 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 12, 2020, 11:17:59 AM
There were in fact incidents of voter intimidation. Are you sure you want to try to laugh it off?

There were in fact incidents of ballot fraud. Were they carefully planned, systematically executed and so widespread and massive as to really rig the elections? Of course not. The same goes for voter intimidation. Actually I'm sure that this is not the first presidential elections where both isnignifcant ballot fraud and insignificant voter intimidation occured.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on November 13, 2020, 02:54:52 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 12, 2020, 08:56:05 AM
     Even if we gave him maximum credit for effort, Trump isn't a dictator. He's simply not up to it. To be fair, it would be difficult for anyone. Democratic states are designed to be deep enough to withstand assault by autocrats. It's not just a matter of form, it's how form and practice are fused. As an economist might say, the Constitution in the US is largely a "post facto identity", a compact to formalize a path already taken.

Of course he's not a dictator any more than he was a successful businessman or a great president. Those were just roles he played on TV, the former apparently successfully enough to entertain the clueless, the latter quite poorly one must say, since he got cancelled after the first season for perpetually low ratings. His current mimicking of authoritarian behavior is a screen test for one of the two roles he's currently up for, that of American dictator. The only other role on offer is con man and career criminal harried by the AG of New York, the criminal division of the IRS, and former victims launching libel suits. He already has that role down and doesn't like the inevitable final episode. So he's going for the other part. From watching those he admires who've made a success of it, Trump knows winning the role of dictator requires certain actions: co-opting the Justice Department, corrupting the courts, silencing dissenting bureaucrats, removing those in the Pentagon and defense department unwilling to use troops against US citizens, and so on. Is he serious about it? He's as serious about it as the world encourages him to be. He's just seeing if anyone finds him believable in the role. If the screen test goes well he will be perfectly happy to become president for life. On the plus side he's a sociopath who would have no problem jailing and killing opponents. On the minus side he's not too bright, he's lazy, and he's a coward. How is he doing so far? His base likes the act, the press is taking him fairly seriously, and lots of people on the left have their panties in knots over it, so he's encouraged and emboldened. Joe Biden is reacting exactly as we all should — rolling his eyes and dismissing it as too absurd even for reality TV.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Que on November 13, 2020, 03:30:25 AM
Reminder:
Response to the content of a post: yes
Personally directed comment: no.

Q
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 13, 2020, 06:29:31 AM

     'Milk Him Like a Cow': Russian State Media Mulls How to Take Advantage of Trump Before He's Gone (https://www.thedailybeast.com/russian-state-media-mulls-how-to-take-advantage-of-trump-before-he-leaves-office?ref=home)

In an interview with Russian tabloid Komsomolskaya Pravda, the historian Valery Garbuzov, director of the Institute of U.S. and Canadian Studies at the Russian Academy of Sciences, pointed out: "Trump has played a cruel joke on Russian political elites. In 2016, Russia placed a bet on Trump. I don't know what our top officials were thinking. But they made a major miscalculation... It's time for our elites to sober up..."

     State TV in Russia is almost as bad as it is in the US, where opinions are advanced that are nearly impossible for a sentient being to hold.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 13, 2020, 07:22:59 AM
I just play a President on TV

The more interesting questions are why Pfizer opted to front its own costs when the federal spigot was open, and why it raced to distance itself from Operation Warp Speed once the clinical trial findings were released. For answers to those questions, we have to review the long, sad tale of the Trump administration's mishandling of the COVID-19 crisis over the past nine months.

Except for brief interludes, President Trump more or less fumbled pandemic policy and communications from the get-go. In service of his re-election campaign, he sought to downplay the seriousness of the threat. He has encouraged resistance to public health measures like masking and business lockdowns, leading to huge, rotating disease spikes first in the South and more recently in the Midwest. His overheated rhetoric against social distancing and restrictions on business ("Liberate Michigan!") culminated in FBI-thwarted plots to kidnap the governors of Michigan and Virginia. Finally, his resolute refusal to adhere to, or allow those around him to adhere to, basic disease mitigation practices resulted in a mini-epidemic for the first family and dozens of members of his administration. Back in August, even Mitch McConnell started avoiding a White House that looked every day more like a scene from The Hot Zone (https://thebulwark.com/pfizers-art-of-the-deal/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on November 13, 2020, 07:40:15 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 13, 2020, 07:22:59 AM
I just play a President on TV

The more interesting questions are why Pfizer opted to front its own costs when the federal spigot was open, and why it raced to distance itself from Operation Warp Speed once the clinical trial findings were released. For answers to those questions, we have to review the long, sad tale of the Trump administration's mishandling of the COVID-19 crisis over the past nine months.

Except for brief interludes, President Trump more or less fumbled pandemic policy and communications from the get-go. In service of his re-election campaign, he sought to downplay the seriousness of the threat. He has encouraged resistance to public health measures like masking and business lockdowns, leading to huge, rotating disease spikes first in the South and more recently in the Midwest. His overheated rhetoric against social distancing and restrictions on business ("Liberate Michigan!") culminated in FBI-thwarted plots to kidnap the governors of Michigan and Virginia. Finally, his resolute refusal to adhere to, or allow those around him to adhere to, basic disease mitigation practices resulted in a mini-epidemic for the first family and dozens of members of his administration. Back in August, even Mitch McConnell started avoiding a White House that looked every day more like a scene from The Hot Zone (https://thebulwark.com/pfizers-art-of-the-deal/)

The stable genius is denial and he simply can't deal with the fact that he has been wrong since day one about COVID. I'll be honest when I heard he got COVID himself I felt bad for him, then I realized it was a political hoax to downplay the severity of the virus. Given he's in his mid-70s now and sleeps only around 3-4 hours a night (by his own admission), it's nothing short than miraculous that he got over COVID in a few days. And yet, he still doesn't wear a mask. Unbelievable. Irresponsible. Inhumane. That's our president. :-[
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 13, 2020, 07:50:02 AM

     Symptoms of mental difficulty manifest at The Bulwark.

These countries are left with few options to improve their budget balances and stabilize their public-debt ratios. Any attempt at belt-tightening when their economies are still weak would risk deepening the recession, which would  hardly reduce their debt-to-GDP ratio.

     Split these sentences to derive any meaning they might have.

These countries are left with few options to improve their budget balances and stabilize their public-debt ratios

     Countries should improve their budget balances and stabilize their public-debt ratios.

Any attempt at belt-tightening when their economies are still weak would risk deepening the recession, which would  hardly reduce their debt-to-GDP ratio.

     Oh, so......in order to reduce public debt-to-GDP we must do something that would hardly reduce debt-to-GDP.

     Let's review. We must do something that can't work in order to prevent the tragedy of doing something that does work, keeping the economy on life support until it can stop being dead and people can return to jobs.

     Budget balances and debt-to-GDP are measures, not goals. Goals are what happens in the economy. That's where "shoulds" are, not the numbers that occur while you're "shoulding".
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: flyingdutchman on November 14, 2020, 01:19:17 AM
So, Trump's final gambit is to try and convince GOP majority legislators in PA, AZ, MI, and WI to toss the will of the people and select Trump electors.  https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-win-fantasy-electors-bid-053422014.html
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 14, 2020, 02:51:27 AM
The best thing that could happen to the GOP is to get rid of Trump and go for a solid reboot.

This would also allow for some spectacular make-overs for Cruz and Graham, who will be happy, once Trump's embroiled in multiple lawsuits, to claim they never liked him.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 14, 2020, 04:42:06 AM
Quote from: Herman on November 14, 2020, 02:51:27 AM
The best thing that could happen to the GOP is to get rid of Trump and go for a solid reboot.

The GOP could dump it's corporate donors and religious lunatics and became the left wing party for regular people advocating things like medicare for all, New Green Deal, tuition free education etc. AOC & co. would join it and then the US would have a left wing party (rebooted Republicans) and a right wing party (corporate Dems).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 14, 2020, 04:49:54 AM
Quote from: Herman on November 14, 2020, 02:51:27 AMThe best thing that could happen to the GOP is to get rid of Trump and go for a solid reboot.


The actual election results demonstrate otherwise.  In the midst of pandemic and depression, it was Democrats who underperformed and Republicans who did better than expected.  A "solid reboot" is the worst possible advice.  Republicans know this.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Zeus on November 14, 2020, 05:55:55 AM
The Trump brand is damaged.  Rather than a wily outsider, Trump is now an unhinged loser. 

He will help the Dems immensely.  I wish him many years in the spotlight – on OANN and Parler.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 14, 2020, 05:59:52 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 14, 2020, 04:49:54 AM

The actual election results demonstrate otherwise.  In the midst of pandemic and depression, it was Democrats who underperformed and Republicans who did better than expected.  A "solid reboot" is the worst possible advice.  Republicans know this.

In order to actually benefit from the pandemic and depression, the Dems should have fiercely advocated medicare for all, living wage, UBI, etc., but corporate Dems don't believe in those things so they did not. They believe in their own political career and corporate donor money. Only progressives advocated those things and what you know, they all got easily re-elected and new progressives got also elected while some corporate Dems struggled and even lost their election.

The Republicans are just a party, a bunch of power-hungry filthy rich and priviledged individuals. Who cares what's good for them? What is good for millions and millions of regular not so priviledged Americans? That's what I am after.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 14, 2020, 06:07:11 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 14, 2020, 05:59:52 AMThe Republicans are just a party, a bunch of power-hungry filthy rich and priviledged individuals. Who cares what's good for them? What is good for millions and millions of regular not so priviledged Americans? That's what I am after.


When it comes to American politics and policy, what Republicans want matter.  What non-Americans want does not matter.  In real world terms.

Republicans have already adjusted their national office game - hence a record number of Republican women being elected and increases in Cuban and Mexican turnout in key states - and will continue to do so.  Expect right wing populism and nationalism to remain, though in new forms tailored to each state.

And it's not too soon to start thinking about 2024 hopefuls. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 14, 2020, 06:09:18 AM
Aside from a few news stories about how dictatorial Don attempted to do nefarious things to the census, there's been very little news about the results in state level races and what that means for House and Electoral College apportionment.  For sort of good reason.  Republicans picked up the Montana governorship and New Hampshire legislature.  Democrats underperformed at the state level and lost those two states.  (Good job Dems!)  So no big changes.  This means that the battle lines are set for the post-census apportionment battles.  With a high probability that Florida officially overtakes New York in electoral vote count, and Texas perhaps increasing its allotment, that means two large Republican run states could gerrymander 2024 back to the GOP.  I don't know election law in those two states, so perhaps the legislatures and governors will be effectively constrained in carving up their states along partisan lines.

Of course, this is all moot if there is a groundswell of support for eliminating the Electoral College.  This time is different, etc.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 14, 2020, 06:20:50 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 14, 2020, 04:49:54 AM

The actual election results demonstrate otherwise.  In the midst of pandemic and depression, it was Democrats who underperformed and Republicans who did better than expected.  A "solid reboot" is the worst possible advice.  Republicans know this.
And with groups of people who were considered a lock for Democrats. I don't think Dems will get the right message from this, i.e. that it's them who should reboot: dump identity politics and all that mess of applied post-modernism, critical theory, woke politics, etc. The people that broke late in the election broke for Trump. It's pretty scary to me that Trump almost won. I actually like Biden more and more these days but I know what's coming after him and it ain't good.   
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 14, 2020, 06:24:09 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 14, 2020, 06:07:11 AM

When it comes to American politics and policy, what Republicans want matter.  What non-Americans want does not matter.  In real world terms.

Republicans have already adjusted their national office game - hence a record number of Republican women being elected and increases in Cuban and Mexican turnout in key states - and will continue to do so.  Expect right wing populism and nationalism to remain, though in new forms tailored to each state.

And it's not too soon to start thinking about 2024 hopefuls.

I have not claimed what I want matters. I want things regardless of whether they mattered or not because I am a human being and human beings are known to want things.

Expect huge social unrest in your country (we already saw a glimbse of it with BLM protests), because the current political system is unsustainable. I come from a country that is considered the most stable society in the World, so I might have insight into what makes a society stable, but then again, my views just don't matter...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 14, 2020, 06:32:45 AM
Quote from: milk on November 14, 2020, 06:20:50 AMI don't think Dems will get the right message from this, i.e. that it's them who should reboot: dump identity politics and all that mess of applied post-modernism, critical theory, woke politics, etc.

It's a safe bet Dems won't learn.  Mainstream news outlets are already touting the idea that Biden will immediately try to roll back some or all of DeVos' policy changes, for instance, which, while minor on its face, has implications down the line.  I would think coming in that Biden should focus on Covid, the economic impact of Covid, and (because it's what he has always supported not because it is what should happen) rebuilding international relationships with traditional allies.  The other stuff is all negotiable.  Of course, that could be how he and his senior advisors see it, too, so we will see in January. 


Quote from: 71 dB on November 14, 2020, 06:24:09 AMExpect huge social unrest in your country (we already saw a glimbse of it), because the current political system is unsustainable.

Social unrest is a common occurrence in the US.  The various 2020 brouhahas paled in comparison to more tumultuous times - '68, the 30s, entire blobs of years from 1873 to 1917 - so I fret not about such things. 


Quote from: 71 dB on November 14, 2020, 06:24:09 AMI have not claimed what I want matters. I want things regardless of whether they mattered or not because I am a human being and human beings are known to want things.

I want a banana.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 14, 2020, 06:41:37 AM
Quote from: milk on November 14, 2020, 06:20:50 AM
And with groups of people who were considered a lock for Democrats. I don't think Dems will get the right message from this, i.e. that it's them who should reboot: dump identity politics and all that mess of applied post-modernism, critical theory, woke politics, etc. The people that broke late in the election broke for Trump. It's pretty scary to me that Trump almost won. I actually like Biden more and more these days but I know what's coming after him and it ain't good.   

Yes, the identity politics stuff isn't "winning" in the same way economical populism is, but corporate Dems must serve their donors or the flow of money stops so they can't adopt economical populism. Solution: Vote corporate Dems out and progressive Dems in. That's actually what's happening, but it is a painfully slow process...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 14, 2020, 06:47:53 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 14, 2020, 06:41:37 AMSolution: Vote corporate Dems out and progressive Dems in.


This is the inverse of the solution.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 14, 2020, 06:57:40 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 14, 2020, 06:32:45 AM
1) Social unrest is a common occurrence in the US.  The various 2020 brouhahas paled in comparison to more tumultuous times - '68, the 30s, entire blobs of years from 1873 to 1917 - so I fret not about such things. 

2) I want a banana.

1) That's why I said we have seen a glimpse of what's coming. Up to 30 million Americans are in danger of getting evicted. We can only hope the amount of evictions turns out to be much less than that because some 10 % of Americans being homeless makes George Floyd protests look like child's play.

2) Trump almost managed to turn the US a banana-republic so your wishes almost came true...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 14, 2020, 07:03:17 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 14, 2020, 06:57:40 AM1) That's why I said we have seen a glimse of what's coming.


If you are going to underline a word, you may want to spell it properly.

Also, you may want to check your sources on eviction figures.  They are detached from reality.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 14, 2020, 07:03:39 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 14, 2020, 06:47:53 AM

This is the inverse of the solution.

Your goal is completely different from my goal so our solutions are very different. My solution is not a solution to your goal because I don't want your goal. I want my goal and to my goal my solution is a solution.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 14, 2020, 07:04:43 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 14, 2020, 07:03:39 AMI want my goal and to my goal my solution is a solution.


Incorrect.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 14, 2020, 07:24:42 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 14, 2020, 07:03:17 AM

1) If you are going to underline a word, you may want to spell it properly.

2) Also, you may want to check your sources on eviction figures.  They are detached from reality.

1) You saw a glimpse of my laziness to use spell check, but at least it gave you an opportunity to attack my English skills instead of the substance.

2) I checked and it turned out it's actually 30-40 million Americans at risk:

https://www.aspeninstitute.org/blog-posts/the-covid-19-eviction-crisis-an-estimated-30-40-million-people-in-america-are-at-risk/

Then again, The Aspen Institute could be detached from reality...  :P
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 14, 2020, 07:45:09 AM
     I Covered Congressional Races in Florida in 2018, and Boy Do I Know Why Trump Won the State in 2020 (https://www.thedailybeast.com/i-covered-congressional-races-in-florida-in-2018-and-boy-do-i-know-why-trump-won-the-state-in-2020?ref=home)

In a piece titled What the Hell Happened to Democrats in Miami-Dade?, Rolling Stone observed ruefully that "Miami-Dade is considered safe—until election night, when suddenly it's not," and quoted Maria Elena Lopez, first vice-chair of the Miami-Dade Democrats.

Lopez lamented how the Democratic National Convention did not talk to, fund, or advise the local parties. "We don't get any feedback from the DNC," she said. "They don't come to us and say, 'Hey, what is the messaging that would work in your community? Where are we weak?' [The party] doesn't do that, at all. We are on our own."

"Unfortunately, this is not the first time that we've seen this," she said. It was not the first time I had seen it either.


     Dems lost local elections because the national party didn't invest in them. Multiculturalism is a fact for Dems, and a theory to cover that fact. As practice, though, Dems haven't learned how to work out the kinks in places like Miami-Dade. Local failures in Florida look a lot like Clinton failures in 2016.

     Too much emphasis is put on the ideological makeup of the Dems, understandably so as people wanting good things progressively makes an easily digestible story while people wanting them centrally doesn't. Dems are the party of "everyone else", and that dictates how they should fight at the local level.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 14, 2020, 07:45:28 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 14, 2020, 07:24:42 AM1) You saw a glimpse of my laziness to use spell check, but at least it gave you an opportunity to attack my English skills instead of the substance.

Incorrect.

Quote from: 71 dB on November 14, 2020, 07:24:42 AM
2) I checked and it turned out it's actually 30-40 million Americans at risk:

https://www.aspeninstitute.org/blog-posts/the-covid-19-eviction-crisis-an-estimated-30-40-million-people-in-america-are-at-risk/

Then again, The Aspen Institute could be detached from reality...  :P

It is.  Property owners are concerned with cash flow, and empty properties generate no cash flow.  Also, politicians from both parties would never allow something on such a scale, as is already in evidence with various state and municipal level eviction moratoria. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 14, 2020, 07:50:43 AM
Quote from: milk on November 14, 2020, 06:20:50 AM
And with groups of people who were considered a lock for Democrats. I don't think Dems will get the right message from this, i.e. that it's them who should reboot: dump identity politics and all that mess of applied post-modernism, critical theory, woke politics, etc. The people that broke late in the election broke for Trump. It's pretty scary to me that Trump almost won. I actually like Biden more and more these days but I know what's coming after him and it ain't good.   

Excellent points.
For instance, see https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/republicans-2020-gains-in-the-house-set-them-up-well-for-2022/
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 14, 2020, 08:17:34 AM
Quote from: milk on November 14, 2020, 06:20:50 AM
And with groups of people who were considered a lock for Democrats. I don't think Dems will get the right message from this, i.e. that it's them who should reboot: dump identity politics and all that mess of applied post-modernism, critical theory, woke politics, etc. The people that broke late in the election broke for Trump. It's pretty scary to me that Trump almost won. I actually like Biden more and more these days but I know what's coming after him and it ain't good.   

     I think that's a rear view mirror take. Post modern critical wokesters are not where we're going, and none of the Dem candidates represented their ideas as well as the conservative media that is so fascinated by them.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 14, 2020, 09:02:04 AM
Quote from: T. D. on November 14, 2020, 07:50:43 AM
Excellent points.
For instance, see https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/republicans-2020-gains-in-the-house-set-them-up-well-for-2022/

If the hard left forgets/fails to digest that it was the appeal to the center which put Biden in the White House, and fail to put pragmatism over "purity" they're just going to feed the Trumpism beast.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 14, 2020, 09:02:57 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 14, 2020, 08:17:34 AM
     I think that's a rear view mirror take. Post modern critical wokesters are not where we're going, and none of the Dem candidates represented their ideas as well as the conservative media that is so fascinated by them.

This is, dare I say, right.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on November 14, 2020, 11:30:14 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 14, 2020, 09:02:04 AM
If the hard left forgets/fails to digest that it was the appeal to the center which put Biden in the White House, and fail to put pragmatism over "purity" they're just going to feed the Trumpism beast.

Amen. I've been fearing that for 2-3 years now. It was reading Pujo's posts that got me in that frame of mind, I must say. :-\

8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 14, 2020, 12:20:25 PM
and the other (rearview) mirror thing is, if Biden c.s. had hoped to flip Florida, he should have spent more time there, like the woman in the article says.

That day Biden went to Texas because it seemed like Texas could be flipped (as if) was maybe not a day well-spent.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 14, 2020, 12:31:49 PM
Quote from: Herman on November 14, 2020, 12:20:25 PM
and the other (rearview) mirror thing is, if Biden c.s. had hoped to flip Florida, he should have spent more time there, like the woman in the article says.

That day Biden went to Texas because it seemed like Texas could be flipped (as if) was maybe not a day well-spent.


Dead on.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 14, 2020, 12:32:55 PM
David Brooks: Dictators around the world are delighted to see an American President refusing to accept the election results.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 14, 2020, 12:36:16 PM
On PBS Newshour Brooks, whom I am not a fan of, was saying the takeaway was that the Dems should stop thinking demographic changes in America will automatically soon deliver them endless victories.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on November 14, 2020, 12:41:20 PM
More now on the #45 / Russia story, but sketchy - further top secret intelligence exists, former FBI chief Andrew McCabe says - but that sources had to be protected ...

"There is some very, very serious, very specific, undeniable intelligence that has not come out, that if it were released, would risk compromising our access to that sort of information in the future. I think it would also risk casting the president in a very negative light - so, would he have a motivation to release those things? "

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-fbi-secret-intelligence-russia-b1722964.html



Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on November 14, 2020, 12:43:10 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 14, 2020, 09:02:04 AM
If the hard left forgets/fails to digest that it was the appeal to the center which put Biden in the White House, and fail to put pragmatism over "purity" they're just going to feed the Trumpism beast.

What "hard left" policies are you guys afraid of?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 14, 2020, 12:51:59 PM
Quote from: Herman on November 14, 2020, 12:36:16 PM
On PBS Newshour Brooks, whom I am not a fan of, was saying the takeaway was that the Dems should stop thinking demographic changes in America will automatically soon deliver them endless victories.

Which harmonizes with, among other things, your comment viz. Florida.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 14, 2020, 01:14:10 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 14, 2020, 09:02:04 AM
If the hard left forgets/fails to digest that it was the appeal to the center which put Biden in the White House, and fail to put pragmatism over "purity" they're just going to feed the Trumpism beast.

During Obama's 8 years in White House the Dems lost over 1000 seats "appealing to the center" so EMPIRICAL evidence tells us appealing to the center is not working. Regular people don't like corporate Dems and corporate Dems hate their voters. Regular people strugging to pay the bills and in danger of going bankrupt if they get ill don't want corruption and enless enrichment of insurance companies, military industry complex etc. Biden won because Trump is insanely bad. This was an anti-Trump election. Like Kyle Kulinski says, a rusty bucket filled with vomit would have won Trump. Since this election was this close, Biden is not much better than a rusty bucket filled with vomit, practically a moderate Republican who is against medicare for all in the middle of a pandemic while 80-90 % of Democratic base is for medicare for all. If Biden was campaigning for the economic populism he could have won over 400 electoral votes.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 14, 2020, 01:16:36 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 14, 2020, 01:14:10 PMDuring Obama's 8 years in White House the Dems lost over 1000 seats "appealing to the center" so EMPIRICAL evidence tells us appealing to the center is not working.

Incorrect.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 14, 2020, 01:19:03 PM
After such a rough and tumble campaign that caused so much insomnia and nail biting and general distress, one needs some feel-good stories:

A Democratic defeat in victory: If Joe Biden's party cannot wrest power from the Republicans now, when ever will it? (https://www.economist.com/united-states/2020/11/14/a-democratic-defeat-in-victory)

Republicans Are On Track To Take Back The House In 2022 (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/republicans-2020-gains-in-the-house-set-them-up-well-for-2022/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 14, 2020, 01:29:07 PM
Quote from: Daverz on November 14, 2020, 12:43:10 PM
What "hard left" policies are you guys afraid of?

     Yes, and I think you could also question the "appeal to the center". Does the center want almost good health care, half an economic program, some infrastructure and some not infrastructure? The halfway economic recovery after the GFC did great damage to the prosperity of working class Americans. When the economy fails, there is a search for culprits.

     A centrist appeal is not advocacy for a distinct set of programs. The appeal announces an attitude that's flexible and willingness to compromise and trade. It could be a promise to demons to refrain from demonization and allow them to maintain a human form. They like that.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on November 14, 2020, 01:34:15 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 14, 2020, 01:14:10 PM
During Obama's 8 years in White House the Dems lost over 1000 seats "appealing to the center" so EMPIRICAL evidence tells us appealing to the center is not working. Regular people don't like corporate Dems and corporate Dems hate their voters. Regular people strugging to pay the bills and in danger of going bankrupt if they get ill don't want corruption and enless enrichment of insurance companies, military industry complex etc. Biden won because Trump is insanely bad. This was an anti-Trump election. Like Kyle Kulinski says, a rusty bucket filled with vomit would have won Trump. Since this election was this close, Biden is not much better than a rusty bucket filled with vomit, practically a moderate Republican who is against medicare for all in the middle of a pandemic while 80-90 % of Democratic base is for medicare for all. If Biden was campaigning for the economic populism he could have won over 400 electoral votes.

1)The Right wing party won those seats.
2) There was a candidate who campaigned on economic populism. He got slightly more than 70 million people who thought he was serious.  But he came in second to the guy you think is a moderate Republican.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 14, 2020, 02:16:32 PM
Quote from: JBS on November 14, 2020, 01:34:15 PM
1)The Right wing party won those seats.
2) There was a candidate who campaigned on economic populism. He got slightly more than 70 million people who thought he was serious.  But he came in second to the guy you think is a moderate Republican.


     In order to succeed Dems have to enact programs that can rebuild the economy. For decades neglect has lowered US income from where it would have been if full output and employment had been the goal. The recovery from the GFC was a little more than half the typical recovery in the post war period.

     The most centrist thing Obama ever did was agree with Mitch on running out of dollars for the recovery. Not only wouldn't we spend dollars to boost the economy, we would "not have" them! Just imagine if Trump, Mitch, Nancy and Chuck all got together to tell Americans that not only would no dollars be spent to counter the pandemic crash, but that there weren't any to have, no spending or having either! Fortunately for the country we spent trillions of dollars this time without bothering much about not having them first, and just had them after we spent them.

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 15, 2020, 01:15:19 AM
Quote from: JBS on November 14, 2020, 01:34:15 PM
1)The Right wing party won those seats.
2) There was a candidate who campaigned on economic populism. He got slightly more than 70 million people who thought he was serious.  But he came in second to the guy you think is a moderate Republican.

1) Yes, because of social issues. Most Americans are (often without them realizing it themselves because of badly known labels) left-leaning on economic issues. About 2/3 of Americans support medicare for all. About 4/5 of Americans support $15 living wage and so on... If you support left-leaning economic policies you are left-leaning on those issues regardless of how much you identify yourself as right-leaning/Republican because of you family background or opinions about social issues or whatever reason. You might identify as a Republican because you are pro-life, even if you ALSO support many left-leaning policies. Corporate media misleading people in regards of labels and fearmongering about the left doesn't help. So lets see:

The Republicans offer social conservatism
The Democrats offer social liberalism
Neither of them offer economical populism

So, if you are into social conservatism AND economical populism, the Republicans offer you social conservatism while the Democrats offer you nothing. So, you vote for the Republicans even if you support medicare for all and living wage.

2) Because the corporate media kept fearmongering about Bernie and telling Biden is "most electable." Democratic voters really wanted Trump out, so many of them went behind the "safe bet", even when they politically agree with Bernie (80-90 % of democratic voters support medicare for all). According to Kyle Kulinski Bernie would have got a little bit more electoral votes than Biden. Bernie would have lost Arizona, which Biden won, but Bernie would have won some other states Biden lost such as Iowa and even Texas. Biden struggled with minorities while Bernie would have done better etc. There simply never was factual base for the claims that Biden is most electable. At best he is as electable as Bernie.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 15, 2020, 01:34:19 AM
Quote from: Daverz on November 14, 2020, 12:43:10 PM
What "hard left" policies are you guys afraid of?

Well, everybody having healthcare is a very scary thought! People not going bankrupt because of medical bills? So horrible! Everybody having equal change in life regardless of background thanks to tuition free education? Horror! People enjoying the same standard of living than people in Nordic countries? So scary! They are only some of the happiest countries in the world! Being happy must be so horrible, worse then hell! They pay so much public taxes! Only paying public taxes is bad. Paying privite taxes is nothing even when insurance companies deny care because of whatever excuse. If people had acne 10 years ago they deserve to be denied care and die away! That way CEOs make more money and can buy more yachts! That's the most important thing in society! Rich getting richer! Nothing else matters! That's why left policies are so scary! According to them maximazing the happiness among all people matters! What a lunatic idea! Poor should SUFFER!!! IT'S YOUR FAULT you were born in poor family and didn't inherit 400 million from your dad! You should have chosen your parents better!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 15, 2020, 02:15:39 AM
I know what you mean, but really "Nordic" as a designation has a somewhat unfortunate history of late 19th century race ideology bleeding over into Nazism, and it doesn't help when it is suggested that the way "Nordic" people do things is superior.

Why not just say Scandinavian?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 15, 2020, 02:16:40 AM
Economic devide between Democratic and Republican voters got bigger: Pro-Biden counties make up 70% of the US economy
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 15, 2020, 02:32:46 AM
Quote from: Herman on November 15, 2020, 02:15:39 AM
I know what you mean, but really "Nordic" as a designation has a somewhat unfortunate history of late 19th century race ideology bleeding over into Nazism, and it doesn't help when it is suggested that the way "Nordic" people do things is superior.

Why not just say Scandinavian?

Because Finland is not part of Scandinavia ( =Sweden, Norway and Denmark). There is "extented Scandinavia" called Fennoscandia (or Fenno-Scandinavia) which includes Finland but also parts of Russia. Despite of historical connotations, the term Nordic countries means Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden and is therefor a precise collection of North European countries where social democratic policies have been very successful making them good models for other countries to "copy."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on November 15, 2020, 02:41:07 AM
This is a very old debate, what to include in the Scandinavian region, and not with a definitive answer. In many countries or everyday use, Finland and Iceland are included in the term, especially English-speaking countries. This also comprises, for example, really major travel guides like the Lonely Planet and Rough Guides.

"Nordic" as a term doesn't generally have unfortunate associations in the region locally,  however - only the Nazi ideology and its racist followers, such as the new Nordic Resistance Movement, have misused it; there's a 'Nordic Council' organization between the governments, for example, and long-lived ideas for a new 'Nordic Union' project.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 15, 2020, 03:24:47 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on November 15, 2020, 02:41:07 AM
This is a very old debate, what to include in the Scandinavian region, and not with a definitive answer. In many countries or everyday use, Finland and Iceland are included in the term, especially English-speaking countries. This also comprises, for example, really major travel guides like the Lonely Planet and Rough Guides.

Well, in Finland Scandinavia is thought to include countries with Scandinavian languages: Swedish, Norwegian and Danish. Since Finnish language has hardly anything to do with those languages, Finns don't generally consider being part of Scandinavian countries, but part of Fennoscandia and Nordic countries.

Scandinavia: Denmark, Norway and Sweden. Defined by Scandinavian languages.
Fennoscandia: Norway, Sweden, Finland and parts of Russia next to Finland. Defined geologically (peninsula)
Nordic countries: Island, Norway, Denmark, Sweden and Finland. Defined culturally and politically.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: ritter on November 15, 2020, 03:31:13 AM
From a Mediterranean perspective, the term "Hyperborean" seems the best... :D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 15, 2020, 03:49:02 AM
Quote from: ritter on November 15, 2020, 03:31:13 AM
From a Mediterranean perspective, the term "Hyperborean" seems the best... :D

You are having Tangerine Dreams if you have such perspective.  ;)

[asin]B000000W54[/asin]
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 15, 2020, 03:53:26 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 15, 2020, 03:24:47 AM
Scandinavia: Denmark, Norway and Sweden. Defined by Scandinavian languages.
Fennoscandia: Norway, Sweden, Finland and parts of Russia next to Finland. Defined geologically (peninsula)
Nordic countries: Island, Norway, Denmark, Sweden and Finland. Defined culturally and politically.

One learns something every day
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 15, 2020, 04:06:28 AM
Quote from: Herman on November 15, 2020, 03:53:26 AM
One learns something every day

I hope so. Apparently for example the Northern parts of Mexico are considered part of North America. I had always thought the USA + Canada = North America.  :-X
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 15, 2020, 05:35:57 AM
Did Cheeto just tweet an official concession?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-15/trump-tweets-that-biden-won-election-says-vote-was-rigged
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 15, 2020, 05:50:33 AM
Quote from: T. D. on November 15, 2020, 05:35:57 AM
Did Cheeto just tweet an official concession?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-15/trump-tweets-that-biden-won-election-says-vote-was-rigged
Perhaps.....before recanting it!  ::)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 15, 2020, 05:56:36 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 15, 2020, 05:50:33 AM
Perhaps.....before recanting it!  ::)
Yes. Shoulda known.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-15/trump-acts-defeated-while-still-insisting-he-beat-joe-biden
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 15, 2020, 06:03:00 AM
Quote from: T. D. on November 15, 2020, 05:56:36 AM
Yes. Shoulda known.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-15/trump-acts-defeated-while-still-insisting-he-beat-joe-biden
What do you think that the chances are that he'll have to be escorted out of the White House?  I suspect that he'll start packing on December 15th (the day after the electors meet)....or maybe just after Christmas?

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 15, 2020, 06:07:50 AM
He sure is busy golfing.

Golfing and tweeting.

Other than that, nothing.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on November 15, 2020, 06:29:27 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 15, 2020, 06:03:00 AM
What do you think that the chances are that he'll have to be escorted out of the White House?  I suspect that he'll start packing on December 15th (the day after the electors meet)....or maybe just after Christmas?

PD

Probably not until Congress certifies the electoral votes on January 6.  He'll resign, and then Pence will be sworn in as POTUS so that he can pardon Trump. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 15, 2020, 07:13:18 AM
Quote from: Daverz on November 15, 2020, 06:29:27 AM
Probably not until Congress certifies the electoral votes on January 6.  He'll resign, and then Pence will be sworn in as POTUS so that he can pardon Trump.
Oh, God, I hope that it doesn't get dragged out that long!

And I hope that Pres. Trump doesn't try and go to that extreme!  It would also be an admission of guilt--which he's never admitted any wrong-doing.  Looking up presidential pardon, according to one website:

"Presidential Pardon Rules and Procedures

The rules and procedures for seeking and receiving a pardon are contained in the Code of Federal Regulations (Title 28, Chapter 1, Part 1). Anyone who wishes to apply for clemency at the federal level must follow the rules and file a petition with the Department of Justice (specifically, the Office of the Pardon Attorney).

The Pardon Attorney and their staff review petitions for clemency (either for a pardon or a commutation), conduct investigations, and prepare recommendations for the President. While the guilt or innocence of the petitioner isn't considered (i.e. the conviction stands), the decision to grant clemency generally rests on the following factors:

Post-conviction conduct, character, and reputation;
Seriousness of the offense;
*Acceptance of responsibility, remorse, and atonement;
Need for relief; and
Official recommendations and reports.
Although there are formal procedures and guidelines in place for a presidential pardon or commutation, the President is not bound by these rules and may issue clemency in accordance with the powers granted by the Constitution."

*I can't see this happening, can you?  And I'm not even going into some of the other factors!  ::)

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 15, 2020, 07:13:42 AM
Quote from: Daverz on November 15, 2020, 06:29:27 AM
He'll resign, and then Pence will be sworn in as POTUS so that he can pardon Trump.

Every time people talk about Biden as #46 I think, 47 is the more likely number, due to the pardon-necessitated switcheroo.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on November 15, 2020, 07:16:06 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 15, 2020, 07:13:18 AM
"[snip] Although there are formal procedures and guidelines in place for a presidential pardon or commutation, the President is not bound by these rules and may issue clemency in accordance with the powers granted by the Constitution."

*I can't see this happening, can you?

Oh, absolutely. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 15, 2020, 07:21:32 AM
Quote from: Daverz on November 15, 2020, 07:16:06 AM
Oh, absolutely.
The article also mentions that asking for a pardon is also, basically, an admission of guilt.  Would Pres. Trump be willing to do that...thinking of all of his denials and ego?  And would VP Pence be willing to go so low too?  Or would he try and justify it in his head that the Dems are just on a witch hunt?

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 15, 2020, 07:27:10 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 15, 2020, 06:03:00 AM
What do you think that the chances are that he'll have to be escorted out of the White House?  I suspect that he'll start packing on December 15th (the day after the electors meet)....or maybe just after Christmas?

PD
Take into account that I (a) absolutely loathe Cheeto Mussolini; (b) am inclined to pessimism, but...

I expect CM to attempt to monkey with the Electoral College and seek to have electors change their votes.
See for instance
https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/14/opinions/the-electoral-college-is-not-going-to-give-trump-a-second-term/index.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/11/12/could-electoral-college-be-stolen-biden/   (I can't read this due to paywall)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 15, 2020, 07:32:12 AM
Back in 2016, various people placed faith in faithless electors throwing the election to Hillary.  They did not.  I should like to understand how this time is somehow different.

I also wonder what actual con law experts say about the pardon clause and what is possible.  Last I read, actual experts are divided on what Trump can do or may need to do.

And for apparent techno newbies, use a Chrome incognito session if you really want to read AmPo stories for free.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 15, 2020, 07:48:34 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 15, 2020, 07:21:32 AM
And would VP Pence be willing to go so low too?


No question.

If asked to justify, he'd cleverly say the USA is no banana republic, where former presidents etc are thrown in the slammer.

In that way he'd follow standard GOP procedure of projection.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 15, 2020, 10:50:16 AM
Quote from: T. D. on November 15, 2020, 07:27:10 AM
Take into account that I (a) absolutely loathe Cheeto Mussolini; (b) am inclined to pessimism, but...

I expect CM to attempt to monkey with the Electoral College and seek to have electors change their votes.
See for instance
https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/14/opinions/the-electoral-college-is-not-going-to-give-trump-a-second-term/index.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/11/12/could-electoral-college-be-stolen-biden/   (I can't read this due to paywall)
Thanks for the links; I was able to read the CNN one.  Not particularly surprised (maybe a bit) how often both parties have tried to sway the electors, but the upshot of the CNN article is--not likely to sway enough to make a difference...the numbers are normally very few.

Do you think that Pres. Trump would try and go so far as to resign and try and get a presidential pardon?

Quote from: Todd on November 15, 2020, 07:32:12 AM


I also wonder what actual con law experts say about the pardon clause and what is possible.  Last I read, actual experts are divided on what Trump can do or may need to do.

Do you (or anyone else here) have any suggestions as to who are some good law experts to check out?

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 15, 2020, 10:52:17 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 15, 2020, 10:50:16 AMDo you (or anyone else here) have any suggestions as to who are some good law experts to check out?


I do not.  I eagerly await seeing the experts others on this forum rely on.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on November 15, 2020, 12:19:28 PM
Quote from: Herman on November 15, 2020, 07:48:34 AM
No question.

If asked to justify, he'd cleverly say the USA is no banana republic, where former presidents etc are thrown in the slammer.

In that way he'd follow standard GOP procedure of projection.

A pardon would be spun as thwarting the inevitable demoncrap witch hunt against Trump.  Take that, libtards!  It would also ensure Pence's place on the wingnut welfare gravy train.  But maybe Trump will try to cut out the middleman and pardon himself.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 15, 2020, 01:51:53 PM
Quote from: Daverz on November 15, 2020, 12:19:28 PM
A pardon would be spun as thwarting the inevitable demoncrap witch hunt against Trump.  Take that, libtards!  It would also ensure Pence's place on the wingnut welfare gravy train.  But maybe Trump will try to cut out the middleman and pardon himself.
My gut level feeling (even though it's unchartered waters) is that it would declared unlawful (so I would prefer that he take this route--if at all).  Others here?  Agree/disagree? Thoughts, comments and/or questions.

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 15, 2020, 01:56:50 PM
The GOP  has a long track record of spinelessness over Trump's crimes, so don't expect them to grow a spine now.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 15, 2020, 01:58:36 PM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 15, 2020, 01:51:53 PM
My gut level feeling (even though it's unchartered waters) is that it would declared unlawful (so I would prefer that he take this route--if at all).  Others here?  Agree/disagree? Thoughts, comments and/or questions.

PD
I'm no lawyer.
For much of my adult life, Laurence Tribe (Harvard) has been the most-cited Constitutional expert. GOP surely thinks he's a libtard, though.
https://www.msnbc.com/the-reidout/watch/laurence-tribe-explains-how-trump-probably-can-t-pardon-himself-95895109662
He said there's no precedent, but there's a well-known 410-year-old British ruling that one can't act as one's own judge.
Clip is too short to be conclusive. Perhaps a possibility of Pence giving the pardon?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 15, 2020, 02:05:21 PM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 15, 2020, 10:50:16 AM
Thanks for the links; I was able to read the CNN one.  Not particularly surprised (maybe a bit) how often both parties have tried to sway the electors, but the upshot of the CNN article is--not likely to sway enough to make a difference...the numbers are normally very few.
...

Here's a fairly detailed analysis
https://www.lawfareblog.com/how-hard-it-overturn-american-election
Concludes that the elector gambit is unlikely.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 15, 2020, 02:20:45 PM
Quote from: T. D. on November 15, 2020, 01:58:36 PM
I'm no lawyer.
For much of my adult life, Laurence Tribe (Harvard) has been the most-cited Constitutional expert. GOP surely thinks he's a libtard, though.
https://www.msnbc.com/the-reidout/watch/laurence-tribe-explains-how-trump-probably-can-t-pardon-himself-95895109662
He said there's no precedent, but there's a well-known 410-year-old British ruling that one can't act as one's own judge.
Clip is too short to be conclusive. Perhaps a possibility of Pence giving the pardon?
Thank you for mentioning him and the link.  One thing that kills me is that he could pardon family members.  And before Todd brings this up, yes, I know that Bill Clinton pardoned his half-brother...which I don't think is/was proper either.  Also, in terms of differences (to be fair), Pres. Trump had (still has) family members advising him in official duties at the White House (though unpaid).

Anyway, off to start on dinner.  Take care,

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 15, 2020, 02:50:02 PM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 15, 2020, 02:20:45 PMAnd before Todd brings this up, yes, I know that Bill Clinton pardoned his half-brother...which I don't think is/was proper either.


Whether or not it was or is "proper", whatever that means, it is constitutional.  That is literally the only thing that matters.  The Constitution itself sets the only limitation as cases of impeachment. 

No one knows whether a president can pardon him- or herself, because it has never been done, and no applicable case law exists. Hence the interest in finding out the Notorious ACB's stance on the subject during her hearings.  If Trump pardoned himself, it would be unprecedented, and may end up before SCOTUS.  Anyone who pretends that he or she knows the answers here is simply lying.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 15, 2020, 03:10:10 PM
Quote from: Todd on November 15, 2020, 02:50:02 PM

Whether or not it was or is "proper", whatever that means, it is constitutional.  That is literally the only thing that matters.  The Constitution itself sets the only limitation as cases of impeachment. 

No one knows whether a president can pardon him- or herself, because it has never been done, and no applicable case law exists. Hence the interest in finding out the Notorious ACB's stance on the subject during her hearings.  If Trump pardoned himself, it would be unprecedented, and may end up before SCOTUS.  Anyone who pretends that he or she knows the answers here is simply lying.
Re your first point:  I know that, but I still don't think that it's right...maybe time to make some changes?  I do realize that it won't happen in the immediate future and would require a lot of legal thought/work/voting (demand?) by the populace that this matter be addressed?  I don't know, but it's something to look into in my view.  Do you agree?  Seriously, I'd like to hear your thoughts on the matter as well as others here.

I don't think that it's a case of "pretending that he or she knows", but am curious as to others who specialize in constitutional law ...what their thoughts are and why.  I'm quite curious--and interested.  :)

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 15, 2020, 03:20:53 PM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 15, 2020, 03:10:10 PMDo you agree?


The pardon power exists in its current form for a variety of reasons, including the fact that people are unfairly prosecuted and have been under all legal systems, at all times, in all places, and the inclusion in the Constitution was a very wise choice.  The general population cares less about this than the Electoral College, and neither will change anytime soon, if ever.  The pardon power is less likely to be changed because presidents of all parties in the history of the republic have used it, and today both Democrat and Republican presidents use it for political purposes - and sometimes they even use it to achieve a degree of justice.  The power is an essential one.


Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 15, 2020, 03:10:10 PMI don't think that it's a case of "pretending that he or she knows", but am curious as to others who specialize in constitutional law ...what their thoughts are and why.  I'm quite curious--and interested.


They do not know, either.  Mr Tribe, a definite scholar on the subject, is also ideologically inclined and can offer only one outlook - and one that will almost certainly not sway SCOTUS as a whole if they must decide one the matter.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on November 16, 2020, 12:19:31 AM
The Princeton professor Werner Mueller's current article on 'de-Trumpification' has been reprinted in many newspapers world-wide.

https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/truth-commissions-to-investigate-trump-and-democratic-vulnerabilities-by-jan-werner-mueller-2020-11
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: vandermolen on November 16, 2020, 01:37:25 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on November 16, 2020, 12:19:31 AM
The Princeton professor Werner Mueller's current article on 'de-Trumpification' has been reprinted in many newspapers world-wide.

https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/truth-commissions-to-investigate-trump-and-democratic-vulnerabilities-by-jan-werner-mueller-2020-11
Interesting article. Thanks for posting it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: ritter on November 16, 2020, 02:02:12 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 15, 2020, 02:50:02 PM

Whether or not it was or is "proper", whatever that means, it is constitutional.  That is literally the only thing that matters.  The Constitution itself sets the only limitation as cases of impeachment. 

No one knows whether a president can pardon him- or herself, because it has never been done, and no applicable case law exists. Hence the interest in finding out the Notorious ACB's stance on the subject during her hearings.  If Trump pardoned himself, it would be unprecedented, and may end up before SCOTUS.  Anyone who pretends that he or she knows the answers here is simply lying.
What from a foreign perspective is hard to understand is a "blanket" pardon being hypothetically granted by the current POTUS to himself (or by his successor in the--even more hypothetical--case he abruptly resigns and the current VP becomes POTUS). In other legal systems where the pardon exists as a prerogative of the executive, the pardon has to be granted for an act that has been prosecuted and resulted in a conviction. "Preemptive pardons" are not contemplated to the best of my knowledge, as these would be equivalent to granting immunity from prosecution (which is a step that would require the passing of a law). And, AFAIK, the current POTUS has not been convicted of any crime.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 16, 2020, 02:11:50 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 15, 2020, 03:20:53 PM

The pardon power exists in its current form for a variety of reasons, including the fact that people are unfairly prosecuted and have been under all legal systems, at all times, in all places, and the inclusion in the Constitution was a very wise choice.  The general population cares less about this than the Electoral College, and neither will change anytime soon, if ever.  The pardon power is less likely to be changed because presidents of all parties in the history of the republic have used it, and today both Democrat and Republican presidents use it for political purposes - and sometimes they even use it to achieve a degree of justice.  The power is an essential one.
Yes, I agree that it is essential, but maybe there is another course of action to take?  What about coming up with some further guidelines/restrictions/procedures for judging who should be eligible and why?  Just some thoughts.  :)

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 16, 2020, 02:12:53 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on November 16, 2020, 01:37:25 AM
Interesting article. Thanks for posting it.
+1 A lot of food for thought!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 16, 2020, 04:02:52 AM
ME: "In less than 10 weeks Trump has left the White House and Biden is inaugurated. The boring corporate status quo nothing-will-fundamentally-change presidency starts for the next four years. Time to finally tune out of (American) politics after four exhausting years."

DAVID PAKMAN: "This is NOT the Time to Tune Out of Politics"

https://www.youtube.com/v/g_KIOiwsBbg
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 16, 2020, 04:32:57 AM
Quote from: ritter on November 16, 2020, 02:02:12 AMAnd, AFAIK, the current POTUS has not been convicted of any crime.


There is already precedent for a president pardoning a former president.  Ford granted Nixon a full and unconditional pardon for crimes Nixon may have committed.  Perhaps Trump extends that to a president pardoning him- or herself.  Could be fun.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: ritter on November 16, 2020, 05:04:55 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 16, 2020, 04:32:57 AM

There is already precedent for a president pardoning a former president.  Ford granted Nixon a full and unconditional pardon for crimes Nixon may have committed.  Perhaps Trump extends that to a president pardoning him- or herself.  Could be fun.
Indeed. I was aware of that Ford pardon of Nixon, but it still strikes me (as a foreigner) as odd: as you say, the pardon was for crimes Nixon "may have committed", not for any actual convictions.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 16, 2020, 05:11:22 AM
Quote from: ritter on November 16, 2020, 05:04:55 AM
Indeed. I was aware of that Ford pardon of Nixon, but it still strikes me (as a foreigner) as odd: as you say, the pardon was for crimes Nixon "may have committed", not for any actual convictions.


Correct.  I believe the whole Watergate scandal was a long national nightmare, or some such, and Ford put an end to it.  Nice guy.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on November 16, 2020, 05:38:33 AM
Quote from: ritter on November 16, 2020, 05:04:55 AM
Indeed. I was aware of that Ford pardon of Nixon, but it still strikes me (as a foreigner) as odd: as you say, the pardon was for crimes Nixon "may have committed", not for any actual convictions.

But Nixon's acceptance of the pardon was, at least in the legal sense, an admission that he has committed crimes which needed a pardon.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 16, 2020, 05:44:50 AM
The most likely turn-of-events will be that Trump steps down in December, Pounds will be a one-month president, just to pardon Trump and the Trumpkins, which won't make a lotta difference since there are state charges, too.

And then Biden will be #47.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 16, 2020, 05:54:41 AM
Quote from: Herman on November 16, 2020, 05:44:50 AMThe most likely turn-of-events will be that Trump steps down in December, Pounds will be a one-month president, just to pardon Trump and the Trumpkins, which won't make a lotta difference since there are state charges, too.

And then Biden will be #47.


It was also all but certain that Trump would steal the election.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 16, 2020, 06:13:00 AM
    Trump can't be the judge in his own case. That's the essence of the argument Tribe and others make in a WaPo article.

Self-pardon under this rubric is impossible. The foundational case in the Anglo-American legal tradition is Thomas Bonham v. College of Physicians, commonly known as Dr. Bonham's Case. In 1610, the Court of Common Pleas determined that the College of Physicians could not act as a court and a litigant in the same case. The college's royal charter had given it the authority to punish individuals who practiced without a license. However, the court held that it was impermissible for the college to receive a fine that it had the power to inflict: "One cannot be Judge and attorney for any of the parties."

The Constitution embodies this broad precept against self-dealing in its rule that congressional pay increases cannot take effect during the Congress that enacted them, in its prohibition against using official power to gain favors from foreign states and even in its provision that the chief justice, not the vice president, is to preside when the Senate conducts an impeachment trial of the president.


      Self pardon will be found unconstitutional if a case reaches the court. Until then the proper analogy should govern predictions, and the law doesn't have one for lawful self judgment.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 16, 2020, 06:27:07 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 16, 2020, 06:13:00 AM
    Trump can't be the judge in his own case. That's the essence of the argument Tribe and others make in a WaPo article.

Not even if he had the least jurisprudential credibility.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 16, 2020, 06:29:39 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 16, 2020, 05:54:41 AM

It was also all but certain that Trump would steal the election.

     He did what he could. Most people thought he would fail. It looks like he failed. It was more like a "stolen election week" than a stolen election.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 16, 2020, 08:55:54 AM

     Trump's mind's on his money and his money's on his mind.

     (https://media.upworthy.mattersmedia.io/brand-img/00xmhL6-r/480x252/gettyimages-132834537-1591796747526.jpg)


Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 16, 2020, 09:07:48 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 16, 2020, 06:29:39 AM
     He did what he could. Most people thought he would fail. It looks like he failed. It was more like a "stolen election week" than a stolen election.

And look at all the Republicans acknowledging the results.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 16, 2020, 09:10:13 AM
How the Toddler-in-Chief Failed to Steal the Election (https://podcast.thebulwark.com/how-the-toddler-in-chief-failed-to-steal-the-election)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 16, 2020, 09:27:07 AM
Quote from: JBS on November 16, 2020, 05:38:33 AM
But Nixon's acceptance of the pardon was, at least in the legal sense, an admission that he has committed crimes which needed a pardon.

     The next AG will probably let nature take its course on prosecuting Trump. It would be crazy to do otherwise. There's a lot more long national nightmare to come.

     A news person guy says:

President-elect Joe Biden has said his Justice Department would be totally independent and that he wouldn't tell the Justice Department whom to prosecute. But he's also said in an August interview that prosecuting a former president would be "probably not very good for democracy."

     Biden wants to play by the old rules so they will still be the rules. The rules were followed so long because Presidents, even Nixon, recognized some limits on how far they were willing to go. Trump was only limited by his incompetence and failure to distinguish a trial balloon from a real world coup. Perhaps he thought he could inspire a kind of "meet the leader in the middle" uprising. I'll suggest that no bright line exists to distinguish the real from the fake in this regard. As the numbers grow "this is no dream! this is really happening!" takes over.

     (https://i.pinimg.com/originals/89/4e/3f/894e3fd5ceecddcaafdc84a26f1d6193.jpg)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 16, 2020, 09:50:40 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 16, 2020, 05:54:41 AM

It was also all but certain that Trump would steal the election.

Well, you can't say he did not try.

Nobody can beat your prediction of a Biden landslide.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 16, 2020, 10:12:03 AM
Quote from: Herman on November 16, 2020, 09:50:40 AM
Well, you can't say he did not try.


     Trump put too much deniability into his effort. We know how Trump hedges risk to his reputation. If it didn't work he didn't do it.

     So, who among the Trump offspring "has his father's eyes"?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 16, 2020, 10:57:37 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 16, 2020, 09:10:13 AM
How the Toddler-in-Chief Failed to Steal the Election (https://podcast.thebulwark.com/how-the-toddler-in-chief-failed-to-steal-the-election)

"Conning supporters, but not actually affecting results."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 16, 2020, 11:08:29 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 16, 2020, 10:57:37 AM
"Conning supporters, but not actually affecting results."

Not just your typical Cheeto Mussolini tantrum, but a strategy that has been planned for years:

https://news.yahoo.com/behind-trumps-yearslong-effort-turn-132056603.html
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 16, 2020, 11:17:40 AM
Quote from: Dowder on November 16, 2020, 08:41:20 AM
Trump should go retire to Israel and write his memoirs.

IT WOULD BE THE FIRST EVER MEMOIRS WRITTEN ALL CAPS.  :P
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 16, 2020, 11:30:39 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 16, 2020, 11:17:40 AM
IT WOULD BE THE FIRST EVER MEMOIRS WRITTEN ALL CAPS.  :P

It'd of course be ghostwritten, but no doubt the ghost writer would throw in lots of caps for verisimilitude.  :laugh:

Would bookshops file the, uh, product (trying to restrain myself) under "Fiction" or "Memoirs"?  :D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 16, 2020, 11:36:25 AM
Quote from: T. D. on November 16, 2020, 11:30:39 AM
It'd of course be ghostwritten, but no doubt the ghost writer would throw in lots of caps for verisimilitude.  :laugh:

Yeah, it must be written by a GHOSTWRITER.

Quote from: T. D. on November 16, 2020, 11:30:39 AMWould bookshops file the, uh, product (trying to restrain myself) under "Fiction" or "Memoirs"?  :D

It should be filed under "Delusions."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 16, 2020, 12:54:54 PM
Quote from: MusicTurner on November 16, 2020, 12:19:31 AM
The Princeton professor Werner Mueller's current article on 'de-Trumpification' has been reprinted in many newspapers world-wide.

https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/truth-commissions-to-investigate-trump-and-democratic-vulnerabilities-by-jan-werner-mueller-2020-11

Good piece.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 16, 2020, 01:51:12 PM
Breaking news:  Pres. Trump wants to withdraw more troops from Afghanistan and Iraq--against the advice of top military officers.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/pentagon-prepares-for-trump-order-to-withdraw-troops-from-afghanistan-iraq/ar-BB1b45YL

Just heard the news on CNN

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: premont on November 16, 2020, 02:20:28 PM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 16, 2020, 01:51:12 PM
Breaking news:  Pres. Trump wants to withdraw more troops from Afghanistan and Iraq--against the advice of top military officers.

He has never listened to the expertise. And as predicted, he wants to create chaos in his lame (Donald) duck period to make things as difficult as possible for Biden. Apparently he neither cares about his legacy nor the USA.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 16, 2020, 02:40:19 PM
Quote from: (: premont :) on November 16, 2020, 02:20:28 PM
He has never listened to the expertise. And as predicted, he wants to create chaos in his lame (Donald) duck period to make things as difficult as possible for Biden. Apparently he neither cares about his legacy nor the USA.

Take a look at his recent Twitter postings--even just today.  At this point I'm wondering if he's truly delusional.  I don't know, premont, perhaps he's thinking that he's fulfilling promises made?  And that Americans who have military family overseas there will welcome his actions and come and support him?  I honestly don't know at this point whether or not he's trying ' to make things as difficult as possible for Biden'.  I suspect that in his mind, he can't conceive of the fact that maybe Americans chose Biden and weren't happy with how he was doing as president.  I do think though that he cares about his legacy.  I'm neither a psychologist nor a psychiatrist though.

In any event, sleep well.  I'm off to fix dinner.

Best wishes,

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 16, 2020, 02:51:01 PM
Quote from: (: premont :) on November 16, 2020, 02:20:28 PM
He has never listened to the expertise. And as predicted, he wants to create chaos in his lame (Donald) duck period to make things as difficult as possible for Biden. Apparently he neither cares about his legacy nor the USA.

And, of course, he's interested in preserving no one's life but his own.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 16, 2020, 03:06:55 PM
Quote from: (: premont :) on November 16, 2020, 02:20:28 PM
He has never listened to the expertise. And as predicted, he wants to create chaos in his lame (Donald) duck period to make things as difficult as possible for Biden. Apparently he neither cares about his legacy nor the USA.

     The military has no doubt tried to tell Trump that our peace partners will attack our troops as they leave the country. Withdrawal must be carefully planned. Trump is not interested.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 16, 2020, 03:13:40 PM
Quote from: drogulus on November 16, 2020, 03:06:55 PM
     The military has no doubt tried to tell Trump that our peace partners will attack our troops as they leave the country. Withdrawal must be carefully planned. Trump is not interested.

He ain't much for planning.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 16, 2020, 03:14:23 PM
President-elect Joe Biden is expected to take a historic step and select a woman to head the Pentagon for the first time. (Source AP politics)

The difference between the Republicans and the (corporate) Democrats:
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 16, 2020, 03:15:34 PM
Quote from: drogulus on November 16, 2020, 03:06:55 PM
     The military has no doubt tried to tell Trump that our peace partners will attack our troops as they leave the country. Withdrawal must be carefully planned. Trump is not interested.
That's what I was talking and worried about.

But what do you think of my earlier comments (about his mental state of health)?

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: premont on November 16, 2020, 03:25:18 PM
One of his sentences is "America first".
What he means is "Trump first".
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 16, 2020, 03:51:22 PM
Quote from: Herman on November 16, 2020, 09:50:40 AMWell, you can't say he did not try.

Despite what has been written on GMG, he did not try. 


Quote from: Herman on November 16, 2020, 09:50:40 AMNobody can beat your prediction of a Biden landslide.

I did not predict a landslide.  I raised it as a possibility based on what a lot of very smart press sorts and pollster sorts - and Dems - stated would happen.  I did predict a Democrat sweep, while picking up seats in the House.  I will confess that I am pleasantly surprised that the Dems displayed even greater incompetence than expected.  The election result has been very satisfying.


Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 16, 2020, 01:51:12 PM
Breaking news:  Pres. Trump wants to withdraw more troops from Afghanistan and Iraq--against the advice of top military officers.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/pentagon-prepares-for-trump-order-to-withdraw-troops-from-afghanistan-iraq/ar-BB1b45YL


Good. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 16, 2020, 06:24:12 PM

     Trying to steal an election while accusing the opponent of stealing of stealing the election is a try, however poorly executed.

     Trump doesn't actually want to do the work of being a President, so it should not be surprising that he can't be bothered learning how to be a tyrant. Tyrants don't have the attention span of a mayfly.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 16, 2020, 06:34:21 PM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 16, 2020, 03:15:34 PM


But what do you think of my earlier comments (about his mental state of health)?

PD

     What Trump cares about is money, not going to prison, money, not being perceived as a loser, and money. If I didn't mention money enough I'll put it in here.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 16, 2020, 06:42:22 PM


     (https://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=30359.0;attach=68749;image)

     I was born in 1949, around the time these planes were designed. Honor is due. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/smiley.gif)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 16, 2020, 08:20:46 PM
Quote from: drogulus on November 16, 2020, 06:24:12 PM
     Trying to steal an election while accusing the opponent of stealing of stealing the election is a try, however poorly executed.

     Trump doesn't actually want to do the work of being a President, so it should not be surprising that he can't be bothered learning how to be a tyrant. Tyrants don't have the attention span of a mayfly.
I can't get into the broken pinball machine of trump's mind but I have a family member who buys into this meshugas about Biden stealing the election. It's interesting in the the case of this person because I've seen her go from voting for Biden in the Dem primary to the tinfoil-hat position - a pretty quick turnaround. I'm fascinated with cults and this is very close to the same kind of thing. If she had just become (more or less) conservative I would have no trouble engaging with her; I'm interested in different points of view. But this is not about ideas and there's no good logic to this. It's a cult. She's actually said to her parents that she needs a break from communicating with them because she thinks they're brainwashed (by accepting the MSM reporting that Biden won). Her social media posts have declined in quality and become darker and sillier. She keeps threatening to quit Facebook but she gets almost no likes or comments there anyway. It's sad to me that the Republican Party sticks with this kind of (lack of) reasoning. I don't know what's worse: the cynical encouragement of conspiratorial and weak thinking in order to raise campaign dough and increase/maintain power, the actual belief in horse-sh%t nonsense, or what's on the other side:
Which brings me to the other side of planet America: Honestly, I've never thought of voting for a Republican but I can, at least, understand those that broke late for trump in order to thumb their noses at the wacky positions of Dems. Pace the "woke" left that thinks sex (male/female) is not real, that trumpets (no pun) defunding the police, that interjects race/critical race theory/intersectionality into all discussions, that see's "western culture" only in terms of "white supremacy" and abandons King's dream of a society where race doesn't matter (or exist!), that blows up extremely boutique cultural-political questions, like transsexuality, into major societal problems, cancel culture, cultural appropriation,  etc. etc.
I wonder if you could say almost the exact thing about the left's own eccentric religious dogma as the right's: that there are people adopting an ideology, a set of opinions (like a religion) including that gender isn't real (but homosexuality is, paradoxically, genetic - a reason more gay males voted trump?) that society's resources and institutions should be reorganized according to racial identity/hierarchies, that systems of rights, checks and balances, processes in law and in journalism should be abandoned (#believe all women?), de-platform, cancel, that western liberalism is ultimately evil, etc. etc.     
I think most or many liberals accept these positions like religious dogma but I wonder if the Kamala Harris types are, much like the republican establishment vis a vis denialism, also invoking woke-ness as a kind of religious dogma.
Anyway, sorry about my long rant. But I come back to this: how the person in my family get to this weird place? She went from anti-vaccinations to anti-mask/COVID to MAGA-land - quite a leap but maybe small steps leading in one direction.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on November 16, 2020, 08:27:39 PM
Quote from: Todd on November 16, 2020, 03:51:22 PM
Despite what has been written on GMG, he did not try. 

"Despite what has been written on GMG, he did not try" very hard or demonstrate any competence at what he attempted. There, now it's true.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 16, 2020, 09:44:53 PM
Quote from: milk on November 16, 2020, 08:20:46 PM
I wonder if the Kamala Harris types are, much like the republican establishment vis a vis denialism, also invoking woke-ness as a kind of religious dogma.
Sorry, I meant to say Kamala is cynical: using wokeness as a way to generate support and cash while selling out the left's economic agenda to moneyed interests of all sorts.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 16, 2020, 10:52:00 PM
Quote from: milk on November 16, 2020, 08:20:46 PM
I can't get into the broken pinball machine of trump's mind but I have a family member who buys into this meshugas about Biden stealing the election. It's interesting in the the case of this person because I've seen her go from voting for Biden in the Dem primary to the tinfoil-hat position - a pretty quick turnaround. I'm fascinated with cults and this is very close to the same kind of thing. If she had just become (more or less) conservative I would have no trouble engaging with her; I'm interested in different points of view. But this is not about ideas and there's no good logic to this. It's a cult. She's actually said to her parents that she needs a break from communicating with them because she thinks they're brainwashed (by accepting the MSM reporting that Biden won). Her social media posts have declined in quality and become darker and sillier. She keeps threatening to quit Facebook but she gets almost no likes or comments there anyway. It's sad to me that the Republican Party sticks with this kind of (lack of) reasoning. I don't know what's worse: the cynical encouragement of conspiratorial and weak thinking in order to raise campaign dough and increase/maintain power, the actual belief in horse-sh%t nonsense, or what's on the other side:
Which brings me to the other side of planet America: Honestly, I've never thought of voting for a Republican but I can, at least, understand those that broke late for trump in order to thumb their noses at the wacky positions of Dems. Pace the "woke" left that thinks sex (male/female) is not real, that trumpets (no pun) defunding the police, that interjects race/critical race theory/intersectionality into all discussions, that see's "western culture" only in terms of "white supremacy" and abandons King's dream of a society where race doesn't matter (or exist!), that blows up extremely boutique cultural-political questions, like transsexuality, into major societal problems, cancel culture, cultural appropriation,  etc. etc.
I wonder if you could say almost the exact thing about the left's own eccentric religious dogma as the right's: that there are people adopting an ideology, a set of opinions (like a religion) including that gender isn't real (but homosexuality is, paradoxically, genetic - a reason more gay males voted trump?) that society's resources and institutions should be reorganized according to racial identity/hierarchies, that systems of rights, checks and balances, processes in law and in journalism should be abandoned (#believe all women?), de-platform, cancel, that western liberalism is ultimately evil, etc. etc.     
I think most or many liberals accept these positions like religious dogma but I wonder if the Kamala Harris types are, much like the republican establishment vis a vis denialism, also invoking woke-ness as a kind of religious dogma.
Anyway, sorry about my long rant. But I come back to this: how the person in my family get to this weird place? She went from anti-vaccinations to anti-mask/COVID to MAGA-land - quite a leap but maybe small steps leading in one direction.

     On an investment site where I contribute final wisdom I discuss the phenomenon of the "herd of contrarians". They are all having secret knowledge "the mainstream media won't tell you". Why is this not funny?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 16, 2020, 11:28:16 PM
Quote from: drogulus on November 16, 2020, 10:52:00 PM
     On an investment site where I contribute final wisdom I discuss the phenomenon of the "herd of contrarians". They are all having secret knowledge "the mainstream media won't tell you". Why is this not funny?
it's definitely ironic and amusing. But it's a little sad in the case of my family member. It's impossible to reach her. If she were young, I'd say she could pull herself out some day. But she just "woke up" to this now in her 50s. It's a cult. They can't be argued out of it. Did you see that article today about a nurse dealing with COVID patients in South Dakota? They're sick and still won't believe it's real.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Que on November 16, 2020, 11:40:55 PM
Quote from: milk on November 16, 2020, 11:28:16 PM
Did you see that article today about a nurse dealing with COVID patients in South Dakota? They're sick and still won't believe it's real.

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/526204-south-dakota-nurse-says-many-dying-patients-still-insist-covid-19-not#

Scary Medieval superstition stuff...  ???

Q
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 17, 2020, 12:48:54 AM
Quote from: Que on November 16, 2020, 11:40:55 PM
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/526204-south-dakota-nurse-says-many-dying-patients-still-insist-covid-19-not#

Scary Medieval superstition stuff...  ???

Q

What a way to go...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 17, 2020, 02:54:51 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 16, 2020, 03:51:22 PM
Good.

If you think Trump wanting to withdraw troops from Afghanistan and Iraq is good, then you must disagree with the Republicans in general wanting to keep troops in Afghanistan and Iraq. You can't have it both ways, can you?

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 17, 2020, 03:07:06 AM
Quote from: milk on November 16, 2020, 11:28:16 PM
They're sick and still won't believe it's real.

All of this madness makes me feel Covid-19 is nature's solution to deal with climate change: Kill the ignorant low IQ individuals who think climate change is a Chinese hoax away so mankind can wise up and start dealing with the reality. Too bad we educated more intelligent people (I have believed in climate change for over 30 years) have to also suffer from the situation, but seems like the nature has had it with these fools...  :-\
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 17, 2020, 03:36:43 AM
Quote from: milk on November 16, 2020, 08:20:46 PM

Which brings me to the other side of planet America: Honestly, I've never thought of voting for a Republican but I can, at least, understand those that broke late for trump in order to thumb their noses at the wacky positions of Dems. Pace the "woke" left that thinks sex (male/female) is not real, that trumpets (no pun) defunding the police, that interjects race/critical race theory/intersectionality into all discussions, that see's "western culture" only in terms of "white supremacy" and abandons King's dream of a society where race doesn't matter (or exist!), that blows up extremely boutique cultural-political questions, like transsexuality, into major societal problems, cancel culture, cultural appropriation,  etc. etc.
I wonder if you could say almost the exact thing about the left's own eccentric religious dogma as the right's: that there are people adopting an ideology, a set of opinions (like a religion) including that gender isn't real (but homosexuality is, paradoxically, genetic - a reason more gay males voted trump?) that society's resources and institutions should be reorganized according to racial identity/hierarchies, that systems of rights, checks and balances, processes in law and in journalism should be abandoned (#believe all women?), de-platform, cancel, that western liberalism is ultimately evil, etc. etc.     
I think most or many liberals accept these positions like religious dogma but I wonder if the Kamala Harris types are, much like the republican establishment vis a vis denialism, also invoking woke-ness as a kind of religious dogma.

Only a part of the "left" is "woke". Their leftism is about cultural war. This is convenient if you are someone wanting ot uphold economical status quo. It's easy for Disney to put black gays and women instead of white men in movies, but they are not so eager to improve the working  conditions for their workers, because that's economical stuff.

How much do I talk about woke stuff? Hardly at all. I keep talking about medicare for all, tuition free education, ending the wars etc. The economical stuff that the establishment is never supporting, because it's against their interests. The less corrupt the Dems become (when more progressives get elected) the more the Dems can talk about economical populism instead of cultural war stuff.

Anyway, the systemic racism in police must be dealth with ant de-funding is the answer. The funds should be directed to better training etc. That should be a no-brainer to anyone who is not a racist.

Nobody says sex doesn't exist. Biological gender is different from mental stuff. Are we supposed to oppress women to the end of time just because they are women? Are we supposed to oppress black people just because they are black? Nobody says gender of skin color doesn't exist.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 17, 2020, 04:45:31 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on November 16, 2020, 08:27:39 PM
"Despite what has been written on GMG, he did not try" very hard or demonstrate any competence at what he attempted. There, now it's true.

Despite what has been written on GMG, he did not try.


Quote from: 71 dB on November 17, 2020, 02:54:51 AMIf you think Trump wanting to withdraw troops from Afghanistan and Iraq is good, then you must disagree with the Republicans in general wanting to keep troops in Afghanistan and Iraq. You can't have it both ways, can you?

Your question makes no sense.  The US should withdraw troops from Afghanistan and Iraq.  And Syria.  And all the various African countries where the US operates.  To start.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 17, 2020, 06:00:41 AM
Actually, do we have the final, certified results in all 50 states or are votes still being counted? I reckon that by now they should have all finished counting all the votes yet apparently this is not the case.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on November 17, 2020, 06:04:50 AM
When I looked at the election results of the 2016 election I saw a definite divide between rural and urban America.  Of the fifty most populated cities in the US only seven voted for Trump:
Virginia Beach, VA
Jacksonville, FL
Arlington, TX
Tulsa, OK
Oklahoma City, OK
Phoenix and Mesa, AZ (Both in Maricopa County)

In 2020 the divide is even worse.  Only two of the above cities voted for Trump: Oklahoma City and Tulsa.

I am very concerned about this divide in our society.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 17, 2020, 06:12:53 AM
Quote from: arpeggio on November 17, 2020, 06:04:50 AM
When I looked at the election results of the 2016 election I saw a definite divide between rural and urban America.  Of the fifty most populated cities in the US only seven voted for Trump:
Virginia Beach, VA
Jacksonville, FL
Arlington, TX
Tulsa, OK
Oklahoma City, OK
Phoenix and Mesa, AZ (Both in Maricopa County)

In 2020 the divide is even worse.  Only two of the above cities voted for Trump: Oklahoma City and Tulsa.

I am very concerned about this divide in our society.

If this is any consolation, the same divide is apparent in Romania, only reversed: big cities and large towns vote mostly right-of-center while small towns and rural areas vote mostly left-of-center. There is also a geographical divide along North-South and West-East lines, in the same sense.  :D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 17, 2020, 06:31:33 AM
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-17/graham-denies-he-urged-mail-in-ballots-tossed-election-update
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: krummholz on November 17, 2020, 07:04:35 AM
Quote from: milk on November 14, 2020, 06:20:50 AM
And with groups of people who were considered a lock for Democrats. I don't think Dems will get the right message from this, i.e. that it's them who should reboot: dump identity politics and all that mess of applied post-modernism, critical theory, woke politics, etc. The people that broke late in the election broke for Trump. It's pretty scary to me that Trump almost won. I actually like Biden more and more these days but I know what's coming after him and it ain't good.   

At least one member of the Lincoln Project, Stuart Stevens (author of It Was All a Lie), has come all the way out and said basically F. U. to the GOP, that he will work within the Democratic Party to try to wrest control from the Far Left. Before this election I thought he was a fool to abandon the only major party in the country that could be in a position to oppose Leftism. Now I think he has the right idea, or more accurately, the ONLY idea that has a chance. The GOP, with or without Trump, is going to solidify around populist Nationalism. If the Dem Party cannot be returned to its 20th century roots, I'm afraid that we as a country are truly screwed.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 17, 2020, 07:08:58 AM
Quote from: milk on November 16, 2020, 09:44:53 PM
Sorry, I meant to say Kamala is cynical: using wokeness as a way to generate support and cash while selling out the left's economic agenda to moneyed interests of all sorts.

Equating civil rights with "wokeness" is an error.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 17, 2020, 07:51:03 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 17, 2020, 04:45:31 AM
Your question makes no sense.

I think it does make sense.

Quote from: Todd on November 17, 2020, 04:45:31 AMThe US should withdraw troops from Afghanistan and Iraq.  And Syria.  And all the various African countries where the US operates.  To start.

Yes, I agree with this, but the Republicans and the (corporate) Democrats in general do NOT agree with this. Progressives agree with us. Trump seems to agree with us in this issue. So we can agree with Trump OR the Republicans. Not both.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 17, 2020, 08:00:43 AM
Quote from: krummholz on November 17, 2020, 07:04:35 AM
At least one member of the Lincoln Project, Stuart Stevens (author of It Was All a Lie), has come all the way out and said basically F. U. to the GOP, that he will work within the Democratic Party to try to wrest control from the Far Left. Before this election I thought he was a fool to abandon the only major party in the country that could be in a position to oppose Leftism. Now I think he has the right idea, or more accurately, the ONLY idea that has a chance. The GOP, with or without Trump, is going to solidify around populist Nationalism. If the Dem Party cannot be returned to its 20th century roots, I'm afraid that we as a country are truly screwed.

     The Lincoln Project did a great job of promoting the Lincoln Project. What Dem program should they oppose?

     I noticed something interesting among the NeverTrumpers. Once they cut their tribal affiliation they discovered that their reasons to oppose programs Dems favor didn't look so good. It's as though they felt free to make judgments on the basis of merit. It may not last, but I do appreciate the uniqueness of "free radicals" in the politisphere.

     Fighting Leftism among the Dems can be safely left to Dems. The Lincoln Project has no role in that.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 17, 2020, 09:00:10 AM
Who's gonno take Kamala Harris' Senate seat? Gavin Newsom will pick.
Bernie Sanders won the Democratic primary in California showing people over there want leftist social democratic policies.
By far the best pick for this reason is Ro Khanna. This is a huge opportunity for the left.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: AlberichUndHagen on November 17, 2020, 09:15:50 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 17, 2020, 03:07:06 AM
All of this madness makes me feel Covid-19 is nature's solution to deal with climate change: Kill the ignorant low IQ individuals who think climate change is a Chinese hoax away so mankind can wise up and start dealing with the reality.

Darwinism in motion?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 17, 2020, 09:24:33 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 17, 2020, 09:00:10 AM
Who's gonno take Kamala Harris' Senate seat? Gavin Newsom will pick.
Bernie Sanders won the Democratic primary in California showing people over there want leftist social democratic policies.
By far the best pick for this reason is Ro Khanna. This is a huge opportunity for the left.

BREAKING NEWS: Leftist policies favored in California.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 17, 2020, 09:26:03 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 17, 2020, 03:07:06 AM
All of this madness makes me feel Covid-19 is nature's solution to deal with climate change: Kill the ignorant low IQ individuals who think climate change is a Chinese hoax away so mankind can wise up and start dealing with the reality. Too bad we educated more intelligent people (I have believed in climate change for over 30 years) have to also suffer from the situation, but seems like the nature has had it with these fools...  :-\

This is a bad look, friend. COVID does not discriminate on the basis of IQ.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 17, 2020, 09:34:16 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 17, 2020, 09:24:33 AM
BREAKING NEWS: Leftist policies favored in California.
:laugh:
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: bhodges on November 17, 2020, 09:35:40 AM
Interestingly, as of right now, you-know-who hasn't tweeted all day. Unusual, given his regular pattern.

--Bruce
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 17, 2020, 09:39:00 AM
Quote from: Brewski on November 17, 2020, 09:35:40 AM
Interestingly, as of right now, you-know-who hasn't tweeted all day. Unusual, given his regular pattern.

--Bruce
Wow!  Computer problems or arthritis?  :-\
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: bhodges on November 17, 2020, 09:40:07 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 17, 2020, 09:39:00 AM
Wow!  Computer problems or arthritis?  :-\

My guess: holed up in the White House and fuming over the state of things.

--Bruce
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on November 17, 2020, 09:44:08 AM
Just for the record here, about another day at the office, #45 wanted to bomb Iranian nuclear facilities last Thursday, however top officials including Pence and Pompeo talked him from it

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-considered-attacking-iran-main-nuclear-site-2020-11?r=US&IR=T


Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 17, 2020, 09:44:39 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 17, 2020, 09:39:00 AM
Computer problems or arthritis?  :-\

Art-of-the-deal-hritis.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 17, 2020, 09:46:23 AM
Quote from: Brewski on November 17, 2020, 09:40:07 AM
My guess: holed up in the White House and fuming over the state of things.

--Bruce
But isn't that when he likes to tweet the most?  ;)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: bhodges on November 17, 2020, 09:49:45 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 17, 2020, 09:46:23 AM
But isn't that when he likes to tweet the most?  ;)

Point.  ;D

--Bruce
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 17, 2020, 09:58:30 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on November 17, 2020, 09:44:08 AM
Just for the record here, about another day at the office, #45 wanted to bomb Iranian nuclear facilities last Thursday, however top officials including Pence and Pompeo talked him from it

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-considered-attacking-iran-main-nuclear-site-2020-11?r=US&IR=T
???  >:(  :(
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 17, 2020, 10:10:22 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on November 17, 2020, 09:44:08 AM
Just for the record here, about another day at the office, #45 wanted to bomb Iranian nuclear facilities last Thursday, however top officials including Pence and Pompeo talked him from it

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-considered-attacking-iran-main-nuclear-site-2020-11?r=US&IR=T
MT,

Breaking news on CNN:  apparently they are going ahead with dropping troop level numbers to 2,500 each in Afghanistan and Iraq by Jan. 15th.  Not certain how this news is different from earlier one?  More finalized?

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 17, 2020, 10:37:58 AM

     Only about 23% of Repubs support M4A. For a Bidenesque public option plan support rises to 47%. For a Marxist Communistic Socialist transgender plan support is a little lower.

     This is typical. People want the good stuff without the very bad no good label.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 17, 2020, 10:40:41 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 17, 2020, 10:10:22 AM
MT,

Breaking news on CNN:  apparently they are going ahead with dropping troop level numbers to 2,500 each in Afghanistan and Iraq by Jan. 15th.  Not certain how this news is different from earlier one?  More finalized?

PD

    The lowest troop level that permits withdrawing troops to defend themselves is where we are now. That's what the military tried to explain to Trump.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 17, 2020, 11:03:08 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 17, 2020, 10:40:41 AM
    The lowest troop level that permits withdrawing troops to defend themselves is where we are now. That's what the military tried to explain to Trump.
But also, the withdrawal (a full one) is supposed to be contingent upon the Taliban keeping up their end of the deal; which it doesn't appear that they are doing, so to put our troops at further risk of being attacked by having even less people there is crazy.

https://thehill.com/policy/defense/520303-trump-throws-curveball-on-afghan-troop-levels

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 17, 2020, 11:04:48 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 17, 2020, 10:37:58 AM
     Only about 23% of Repubs support M4A. For a Bidenesque public option plan support rises to 47%. For a Marxist Communistic Socialist transgender plan support is a little lower.

     This is typical. People want the good stuff without the very bad no good label.

This varies between polls according to how single payer healthcare is being framed. Some polls purposedly try to frame single payer healthcare as scary as possible. In some other polls the framing is less scary (more honest) and the overall support is higher. At one poll at least half of Republicans supported Medicare for all. Also, lets face it: The Republicans in particular are sceptical about public option and medicare for all because right wing MSM keeps fearmongering about them non-stop. If single payer healthcare was talked about in the media honestly, it's support would be overhelming.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 17, 2020, 11:08:09 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on November 17, 2020, 09:44:08 AM
Just for the record here, about another day at the office, #45 wanted to bomb Iranian nuclear facilities last Thursday, however top officials including Pence and Pompeo talked him from it

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-considered-attacking-iran-main-nuclear-site-2020-11?r=US&IR=T

Trump's overlords in Israel and Saudi-Arabia want war with Iran.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 17, 2020, 11:38:35 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 17, 2020, 07:51:03 AMYes, I agree with this, but the Republicans and the (corporate) Democrats in general do NOT agree with this. Progressives agree with us. Trump seems to agree with us in this issue.

So?


Quote from: 71 dB on November 17, 2020, 07:51:03 AMSo we can agree with Trump OR the Republicans. Not both.

Incorrect.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 17, 2020, 11:55:43 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 17, 2020, 11:04:48 AM
This varies between polls according to how single payer healthcare is being framed. Some polls purposedly try to frame single payer healthcare as scary as possible. In some other polls the framing is less scary (more honest) and the overall support is higher. At one poll at least half of Republicans supported Medicare for all. Also, lets face it: The Republicans in particular are sceptical about public option and medicare for all because right wing MSM keeps fearmongering about them non-stop. If single payer healthcare was talked about in the media honestly, it's support would be overhelming.

     Certainly people can be influenced by diatribes about how radical it would be if people agreed with themselves about what they want. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/smiley.gif)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: krummholz on November 17, 2020, 12:09:44 PM
Quote from: drogulus on November 17, 2020, 08:00:43 AM
     The Lincoln Project did a great job of promoting the Lincoln Project. What Dem program should they oppose?

     I noticed something interesting among the NeverTrumpers. Once they cut their tribal affiliation they discovered that their reasons to oppose programs Dems favor didn't look so good. It's as though they felt free to make judgments on the basis of merit. It may not last, but I do appreciate the uniqueness of "free radicals" in the politisphere.

     Fighting Leftism among the Dems can be safely left to Dems. The Lincoln Project has no role in that.

No one said that the Lincoln Project should get involved with Democratic Party politics. They are a collection of Republicans with a number of different points of view.

I said only that Stuart Stevens, a Lincoln Project member (founding member? not sure) may not have been the fool that I thought he was to jump ship from the GOP, as they are unlikely to abandon the nationalist, even nativist stance they have been leaning toward ever since Trump's hostile takeover of the party. Basically, Stevens said he was going to become a Dem, so it sounds like you shouldn't have a problem with his fighting Dem Leftism. ;)

As far as what Dem programs he might oppose, you would have to ask him. My top picks for now would be the Green New Deal (because powering our society entirely on renewable energy sources is not yet achievable, and may not even be desirable - e.g. consider the land use footprint for solar) and Medicare For All (on the basis of cost). But both are for the future, as neither will be an agenda item under the Biden administration.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 17, 2020, 12:18:16 PM
Quote from: krummholz on November 17, 2020, 12:09:44 PM
No one said that the Lincoln Project should get involved with Democratic Party politics. They are a collection of Republicans with a number of different points of view.

I said only that Stuart Stevens, a Lincoln Project member (founding member? not sure) may not have been the fool that I thought he was to jump ship from the GOP, as they are unlikely to abandon the nationalist, even nativist stance they have been leaning toward ever since Trump's hostile takeover of the party. Basically, Stevens said he was going to become a Dem, so it sounds like you shouldn't have a problem with his fighting Dem Leftism. ;)

As far as what Dem programs he might oppose, you would have to ask him. My top picks for now would be the Green New Deal (because powering our society entirely on renewable energy sources is not yet achievable, and may not even be desirable - e.g. consider the land use footprint for solar) and Medicare For All (on the basis of cost). But both are for the future, as neither will be an agenda item under the Biden administration.

     The Deal that is Green will arrive more gradually than I would like. That's unfortunate but it will be the case. The up front costs for renewable energy have been paid for some forms, now they pay for themselves. That's how it will work in the future for further steps like geothermal.

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: krummholz on November 17, 2020, 01:02:09 PM
Quote from: drogulus on November 17, 2020, 12:18:16 PM
     The Deal that is Green will arrive more gradually than I would like. That's unfortunate but it will be the case. The up front costs for renewable energy have been paid for some forms, now they pay for themselves. That's how it will work in the future for further steps like geothermal.

   

It's not just a question of cost. It's a question of available technology. We do not yet have the battery technology to make fully renewable energy a reality, given the fact that the main sources (solar and wind) are intermittent. As far as I know the technology to make geothermal a major part of the equation does not yet exist, either.

Then there is the land use footprint. I calculated a while back that at our current need for energy, to power the U.S. entirely on solar power would require devoting something close to 1% of the entire land area of the country to energy production. That may not sound like a lot, but it is at least a couple orders of magnitude larger than the land use footprint of fossil fuel extraction and production. And the land use footprint of wind is even worse.

Also, I don't think this country is ready to accept fully electric powered cars as the only widely available personal means of long distance travel. Americans have long been in love with "muscle cars", with fast acceleration, with the convenience of being able to go 300+ miles and then refuel in 5 minutes. I don't see that changing in my lifetime. Electric cars are fine for getting around town, but the average citizen is not going to want to use them for traveling to the cottage or favorite vacation spot several hundred miles away. I think we are stuck with petroleum products for auto and aviation fuel for a good many years to come. Hopefully we won't run out of oil before we find a way to make electric vehicles as practical as internal combustion-powered ones, or are able to develop hydrogen or some other fuel cell technology into a practical reality.

What we need to get away from ASAP is using fossil fuels for electricity generation. That's where renewables can play a major role, but in my opinion we need more, not fewer, nuclear power plants and a concerted, moonshot effort to making fusion energy a reality.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on November 17, 2020, 01:13:54 PM
There are already relatively ordinary electric cars going 350 miles, though most on the European market currently go between 175 - 275 miles. Speedier upload, longer range, better upload facilities, and less expensiveness will surely be a fact here, say within a decade.

Whether there'll be political will in the US is another matter.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 17, 2020, 01:59:11 PM
Meanwhile, Trump's TV lawyer, Rudy "Is my shirt tucked?" Giuliani is representing his client faithfully in court:

'For the past half-hour, attorney Mark Aronchick – representing PA counties being sued by Trump – has loudly torn into Rudy G., saying he is ignorant of the law, living in "some fantasy world" and pushing wild allegations that are "disgraceful in an American courtroom."'
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 17, 2020, 02:12:54 PM
Quote from: krummholz on November 17, 2020, 01:02:09 PM
It's not just a question of cost. It's a question of available technology. We do not yet have the battery technology to make fully renewable energy a reality, given the fact that the main sources (solar and wind) are intermittent. As far as I know the technology to make geothermal a major part of the equation does not yet exist, either.

Then there is the land use footprint. I calculated a while back that at our current need for energy, to power the U.S. entirely on solar power would require devoting something close to 1% of the entire land area of the country to energy production. That may not sound like a lot, but it is at least a couple orders of magnitude larger than the land use footprint of fossil fuel extraction and production. And the land use footprint of wind is even worse.

Also, I don't think this country is ready to accept fully electric powered cars as the only widely available personal means of long distance travel. Americans have long been in love with "muscle cars", with fast acceleration, with the convenience of being able to go 300+ miles and then refuel in 5 minutes. I don't see that changing in my lifetime. Electric cars are fine for getting around town, but the average citizen is not going to want to use them for traveling to the cottage or favorite vacation spot several hundred miles away. I think we are stuck with petroleum products for auto and aviation fuel for a good many years to come. Hopefully we won't run out of oil before we find a way to make electric vehicles as practical as internal combustion-powered ones, or are able to develop hydrogen or some other fuel cell technology into a practical reality.

What we need to get away from ASAP is using fossil fuels for electricity generation. That's where renewables can play a major role, but in my opinion we need more, not fewer, nuclear power plants and a concerted, moonshot effort to making fusion energy a reality.

     We'll work through these problems faster if we accept the challenge and invest in them than if we wait around for them to solve themselves. Either way, we will solve them. We might as well get going.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 17, 2020, 02:26:40 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 17, 2020, 01:59:11 PM
Meanwhile, Trump's TV lawyer, Rudy "Is my shirt tucked?" Giuliani is representing his client faithfully in court:

'For the past half-hour, attorney Mark Aronchick – representing PA counties being sued by Trump – has loudly torn into Rudy G., saying he is ignorant of the law, living in "some fantasy world" and pushing wild allegations that are "disgraceful in an American courtroom."'

Ghouliani doesn't seem to be covering himself in glory:

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/17/trump-lawyer-rudy-giuliani-asks-to-join-pennsylvania-vote-case.html
...
Giuliani earlier in the day adamantly denied a report in The New York Times that he had asked Trump's campaign to pay him a whopping $20,000 per day for his legal work.

"I never asked for $20,000," Giuliani told The Times, saying that Trump offered to "work ... out" any payment to him at the end of the legal process.

The Wall Street Journal later matched The Times story about Giuliani's request, which the newspaper noted was "an unusually high fee." The Journal reported that the Trump campaign did not agree to Giuliani's request, but noted that it could not be determined whether the campaign will pay Giuliani at all.

...
The slapdash nature of the Trump campaign's case in Pennsylvania was underscored by Giuliani's statement to Brann on Tuesday that a claim made in the originally filed lawsuit, which alleged a violation of due process, was mistakenly removed from an amended lawsuit.


A former New York City mayor and federal prosecutor, Giuliani is not admitted to practice law in Pennsylvania federal court, so he needed permission from Brann to appear in the case.

Giuliani's application said that he is "currently a member in good standing" of a number of state and federal courts, and of the District of Columbia Bar.

However, a check of the DC Bar's registry shows that Giuliani's admission there is administratively suspended because of nonpayment of fees. That suspension likely would have no affect (sic) on his admission to the Pennsylvania case.

On the same day that Biden was projected as winner of the election, Giuliani led a widely derided news conference about the vote-counting process outside of Four Seasons Total Landscaping, a small business in Philadelphia located between a crematorium and a sex shop.


Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: flyingdutchman on November 17, 2020, 03:07:08 PM


Incorrect.
[/quote]

There is nothing separating Trumpists and the GOP. They are one and the same.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 17, 2020, 03:10:44 PM
Quote from: MusicTurner on November 17, 2020, 01:13:54 PM
There are already relatively ordinary electric cars going 350 miles, though most on the European market currently go between 175 - 275 miles. Speedier upload, longer range, better upload facilities, and less expensiveness will surely be a fact here, say within a decade.

Whether there'll be political will in the US is another matter.

     There is no faster way to solve technological problems than a big effort starting now. You don't bend down the cost curve by imagining how hard it will be to do.

     Mitch says there's no political will to do whatever it is he's paid to have the political will to do. Along those lines I predict I won't get up from this chair. I'm still here, sitting in the chair. I seem to lack the will to get up. Polls say I won't get up. On the plus side, running out of dollars to get up saves them somewhere. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/smiley.gif)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on November 17, 2020, 03:37:42 PM
In other news, the nation narrowly avoided (by 3 votes in the Senate) the appointment of a goldbug to the Fed.

47 Republican senators voted for the goldbug.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 17, 2020, 03:38:47 PM
Because it's what wannabe autocrats do:

President Trump on Tuesday said in a tweet that Chris Krebs, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency director, has been "terminated." The president, who has continued to refuse to accept that he lost the election, said a recent statement by Krebs, in which he called the Nov. 3 election "the most secure in American history," was "highly inaccurate." There is no evidence to back Trump's claims.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 17, 2020, 03:39:23 PM
Quote from: Daverz on November 17, 2020, 03:37:42 PM
In other news, the nation narrowly avoided (by 3 votes in the Senate) the appointment of a goldbug to the Fed.

47 Republican senators voted for the goldbug.

Nope, still no sign of a spine!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 17, 2020, 03:41:25 PM
Quote from: Daverz on November 17, 2020, 03:37:42 PM
In other news, the nation narrowly avoided (by 3 votes in the Senate) the appointment of a goldbug to the Fed.

47 Republican senators voted for the goldbug.

Pretty astonishing. She's a wingnut even relative to the standard of Cheeto Mussolini appointees.
I fear she still has a chance, though.
See https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-17/shelton-s-fed-confirmation-vote-tightens-with-senator-quarantine
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on November 17, 2020, 04:06:42 PM
I think those people who have held onto their 'Not My President' signs from 2016 may have to get them back out after all is said and done! :D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on November 17, 2020, 06:16:57 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on November 17, 2020, 04:06:42 PM
I think those people who have held onto their 'Not My President' signs from 2016 may have to get them back out after all is said and done! :D

I expect there will be brisk sales to the opposition.... ;)

8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 17, 2020, 06:40:13 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 17, 2020, 03:36:43 AM

Nobody says sex doesn't exist. Biological gender is different from mental stuff. Are we supposed to oppress women to the end of time just because they are women? Are we supposed to oppress black people just because they are black? Nobody says gender of skin color doesn't exist.
Obviously (at least it's obvious to me), we shouldn't oppress anyone. Racism and sexism persist - obviously.
As for the whether anyone believes sex isn't real or doesn't matter:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/nov/16/trans-man-loses-uk-legal-battle-to-register-as-his-childs-father

On another topic, here's something:

'What We in the Legal World Call a Felony': Lawyers Condemn Lindsey Graham, Call for DOJ and Senate Investigations

https://lawandcrime.com/2020-election/what-we-in-the-legal-world-call-a-felony-lawyers-condemn-lindsey-graham-call-for-doj-and-senate-investigations/
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 17, 2020, 11:36:18 PM
Quote from: krummholz on November 17, 2020, 01:02:09 PM
It's not just a question of cost. It's a question of available technology. We do not yet have the battery technology to make fully renewable energy a reality, given the fact that the main sources (solar and wind) are intermittent. As far as I know the technology to make geothermal a major part of the equation does not yet exist, either.

It's also a political question. Fossil Fuel companies bribe the politicians a lot to slow down the change (in absurb ways such as bringing snowballs to the congress as a "proof" the climate isn't warming up). What's the intensive of developping better battery technology when the goverment keeps subsidizing Exxon Mobil instead of renewable energy industry? Now, this is only the US. Elsewhere in the World politicians are not often as bribed and the political will is stronger to do something about climate change. The US is in danger of lagging behind other countries in the field of Green technology.

Quote from: krummholz on November 17, 2020, 01:02:09 PMThen there is the land use footprint. I calculated a while back that at our current need for energy, to power the U.S. entirely on solar power would require devoting something close to 1% of the entire land area of the country to energy production. That may not sound like a lot, but it is at least a couple orders of magnitude larger than the land use footprint of fossil fuel extraction and production. And the land use footprint of wind is even worse.

My calculations indicate about 0.1 % of the land area is need for electricity consumption, but you probably calculated ALL energy consumption. Of course nobody suggests only solar panels are used. There's wind turbines (even if their noise causes cancer according to very stable genius Trump), waterpower, geothermal energy etc., but solar panels are part of the solution.

Quote from: krummholz on November 17, 2020, 01:02:09 PMAlso, I don't think this country is ready to accept fully electric powered cars as the only widely available personal means of long distance travel. Americans have long been in love with "muscle cars", with fast acceleration, with the convenience of being able to go 300+ miles and then refuel in 5 minutes. I don't see that changing in my lifetime. Electric cars are fine for getting around town, but the average citizen is not going to want to use them for traveling to the cottage or favorite vacation spot several hundred miles away. I think we are stuck with petroleum products for auto and aviation fuel for a good many years to come. Hopefully we won't run out of oil before we find a way to make electric vehicles as practical as internal combustion-powered ones, or are able to develop hydrogen or some other fuel cell technology into a practical reality.

Is your country ready to accept the effects of climate change? We don't have the luxury of "accepting" these things. We have to do something if we want this planet to survive our greed. Aliens monitoring us must think we are complete idiots destroying our planet because we want to refuel our cars in 5 minutes!  :P Fortunately not all Americans are that dumb and the Green New Deal is actually very popular. The utter corruption is the main problem.

Quote from: krummholz on November 17, 2020, 01:02:09 PMWhat we need to get away from ASAP is using fossil fuels for electricity generation. That's where renewables can play a major role, but in my opinion we need more, not fewer, nuclear power plants and a concerted, moonshot effort to making fusion energy a reality.

Nuclear power has it's role while we wait for fusion energy, but too much nuclear power compromises the incentive to develop renewable energy.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 17, 2020, 11:40:39 PM
Quote from: drogulus on November 17, 2020, 02:12:54 PM
     We'll work through these problems faster if we accept the challenge and invest in them than if we wait around for them to solve themselves. Either way, we will solve them. We might as well get going.

Yes, and the sooner we act the "easier" it will be.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on November 18, 2020, 03:05:19 AM
Even though Biden won the election our country is still hopelessly divided and I have no idea how we can reconcile our differences.

No matter what we liberals say or do, most conservatives consider us un-American and evil.   
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 18, 2020, 04:04:36 AM
Quote from: arpeggio on November 18, 2020, 03:05:19 AM
Even though Biden won the election our country is still hopelessly divided and I have no idea how we can reconcile our differences.

No matter what we liberals say or do, most conservatives consider us un-American and evil.   
I think if we're just arguing ideas, there should at least be times when we agree on something. What's really hard are the conspiracy theorists. They're not interested in ideas. It's not a philosophy. It's an inoculation against reality. I've tried to talk to them but they've given up on ideas and can only talk about the dark powers that seek to destroy them. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 18, 2020, 05:41:19 AM
Trump fired yet another person who disagreed with him--about the integrity of the US election and cyber-security.  Goodbye to Mr. Krebs.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-54984196

Who's left to run this country and keep us safe?   >:(  :(

PD

p.s.  This is his new Twitter account:  https://twitter.com/C_C_Krebs

and his archived account when he was head of CISA:  https://twitter.com/CISAKrebs
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 18, 2020, 07:06:01 AM
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/republicans-won-almost-every-election-where-redistricting-was-at-stake/

Joe Biden may have won the White House, but down-ballot races were much better for Republicans. In fact, the GOP's victories in state-level elections could pay dividends long after Biden leaves office, thanks to their influence over next year's redistricting process.

Every 10 years, after the census, congressional and state legislature districts are redrawn to account for population changes. This gives whoever is drawing the maps the power to maximize the number of districts that favor their party — a tactic known as gerrymandering. And as we wrote last month, the 2020 election represented the last chance for voters to weigh in on who would draw those maps. Both parties went into the election with a chance to draw more congressional districts than the other, but the end result was just about the best-case scenario for Republicans. As the map below shows, Republicans are set to control the redistricting of 188 congressional seats — or 43 percent of the entire House of Representatives. By contrast, Democrats will control the redistricting of, at most, 73 seats, or 17 percent.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 18, 2020, 07:23:41 AM
Quote from: arpeggio on November 18, 2020, 03:05:19 AM
Even though Biden won the election our country is still hopelessly divided and I have no idea how we can reconcile our differences.

No matter what we liberals say or do, most conservatives consider us un-American and evil.   

- The first step is to make people realize the divide is not actually right - left, but 1 % - 99 % (class war)
- The second step is finding those issues the right and left actually agree about such as ending the wars or NSA spying.
- The third step is improve education system and main stream media so that people understand things better.
- The fourth step is taking money out of politics/ending the corruption.

I believe these steps together could do miracles, but the problem is these are not easy steps to make!  ???
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 19, 2020, 11:22:32 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 18, 2020, 07:23:41 AM
class war

That's not enough. You'll have to preach the accompanying notion of "objective class enemy": an individual who, although personally not guilty of any crime against, and no exploiter of, the people is nevertheless an enemy of the people by the mere fact of being born into, and belonging to, a class (namely bourgeoisie or aristocracy) which by its very existence is an enemy of, and a threat to, the proletariat. Such an individual faces only two choices: (1) to publicly repudiate their own class and join the proletarian struggle, or (2) be obliterated together with their class by the victory of the proletarian revolution.

Sticking with music, two prime examples are Felix Mendelssohn and Sergei Rachmaninoff.

This may sound as a joke but it's not. It's a very serious matter and countless lives have been destroyed in Romania in the name of "class war" and "objective class enemy" --- so I'll perhaps be excused if I see red (pun!) whenever I hear about class war.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 19, 2020, 12:36:35 PM
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-19/trump-to-meet-with-michigan-republicans-in-bid-to-overturn-vote
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on November 19, 2020, 12:42:10 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 18, 2020, 07:23:41 AM
- The first step is to make people realize the divide is not actually right - left, but 1 % - 99 % (class war)
- The second step is finding those issues the right and left actually agree about such as ending the wars or NSA spying.
- The third step is improve education system and main stream media so that people understand things better.
- The fourth step is taking money out of politics/ending the corruption.

I believe these steps together could do miracles, but the problem is these are not easy steps to make!  ???

I do not mean this to be as a criticism of you personally.  Although we disagree on some things you are a very knowledge member.

I live in Fairfax County, Virginia, which is a suburb on Washington, DC.  70% of Fairfax voted for Biden.  Here in Fairfax one rarely meets a Trump supporter, but I know a few.

I have a brother who is a big supporter of Trump.  He lives in Union County, NC, which is a suburb of Charlotte, NC.  61% of Union County voted for Trump.  My wife has many relative who live in North Carolina.   My mother, who lives with my brother, still believes that Obama in a Moslem.  My wife has relatives who do not believe in Darwin and that the world in only 10,000 years old.  I have a niece who does not believe in dinosaurs.

Normally I avoid discussing politics with these people.  Whenever I make the mistake the same thing always happens.  When faced with reality they immediately accuse me of being something I am not.  The last time I made a mistake of discussing politics with a Trumpster, he claimed that all Democrats were anti-Semitic.  One can see the same pattern of behavior with the few Trumpsters who frequent this forum.

Your suggestions sound reasonable if one is trying to carry on a discussion with a rational person.  The vast majority of Trumpsters I have met live in an alternant reality where all Democrats hate America and are evil.

Recently the Dean of Virginia Wesleyan University in Virginia Beach, VA had to resign after making statements that supporters of Biden "were ignorant, anti-American and anti-Christian."(52% of Virginia Beach voted for Biden.  In 2016 most of Virginia Beach voted for Trump.  There are many military that live in Virginia Beach.)
 
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/education/2020/11/17/virginia-wesleyan-university-dean-resigns-statement-biden-voters/6325744002/

I do not see how we can resolve differences with people who deny Darwin and scientific reality.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 19, 2020, 01:05:40 PM
Quote from: arpeggio on November 19, 2020, 12:42:10 PM
I do not mean this to be as a criticism of you personally.  Although we disagree on some things you are a very knowledge member.

I live in Fairfax County, Virginia, which is a suburb on Washington, DC.  70% of Fairfax voted for Biden.  Here in Fairfax one rarely meets a Trump supporter, but I know a few.

I have a brother who is a big supporter of Trump.  He lives in Union County, NC, which is a suburb of Charlotte, NC.  61% of Union County voted for Trump.  My wife has many relative who live in North Carolina.   My mother, who lives with my brother, still believes that Obama in a Moslem.  My wife has relatives who do not believe in Darwin and that the world in only 10,000 years old.  I have a niece who does not believe in dinosaurs.

Normally I avoid discussing politics with these people.  Whenever I make the mistake the same thing always happens.  When faced with reality they immediately accuse me of being something I am not.  The last time I made a mistake of discussing politics with a Trumpster, he claimed that all Democrats were anti-Semitic.  One can see the same pattern of behavior with the few Trumpsters who frequent this forum.

Your suggestions sound reasonable if one is trying to carry on a discussion with a rational person.  The vast majority of Trumpsters I have met live in an alternant reality where all Democrats hate America and are evil.

Recently the Dean of Virginia Wesleyan University in Virginia Beach, VA had to resign after making statements that supporters of Biden "were ignorant, anti-American and anti-Christian."(52% of Virginia Beach voted for Biden.  In 2016 most of Virginia Beach voted for Trump.  There are many military that live in Virginia Beach.)
 
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/education/2020/11/17/virginia-wesleyan-university-dean-resigns-statement-biden-voters/6325744002/

I do not see how we can resolve differences with people who deny Darwin and scientific reality.

When it comes to politics, I am from Mars and my in-laws are from Venus, yet my relationship with them is excellent. The key to this is to never let politics stand in the way. We are not defined by whom we vote for, but by what what we do and how we behave. I hate everything and everyone my father-in-law stands for politically, and viceversa, yet we never had any irreconcilable conflict --- actually, we have always got along very fine. Life is larger than politics.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 19, 2020, 02:56:13 PM
Rudy Ghouliani staged a public meltdown. Literally.  :laugh:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/rudy-giulianis-hair-dye-streaks-down-face-after-my-cousin-vinny-performance

(https://img.thedailybeast.com/image/upload/c_crop,d_placeholder_euli9k,h_1439,w_2560,x_0,y_175/dpr_1.5/c_limit,w_1044/fl_lossy,q_auto/v1605810994/GettyImages-1229683394_s9pjyp)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 19, 2020, 03:16:44 PM
      In a little more than a decade the country has twice fought economic calamity with half measures and that has messed with people's heads. They want someone to blame, and they have found the blameworthy among the usual suspects. We've been here before, in the '30s with Father Coughlin, Huey Long and Gerald L. K. Smith.

     We should make differences, real economic differences, then people will sit still for resolving them. When you don't build the future people will fight over the junkheap of the present.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 19, 2020, 04:02:56 PM
Quote from: T. D. on November 19, 2020, 02:56:13 PM
Rudy Ghouliani staged a public meltdown. Literally.  :laugh:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/rudy-giulianis-hair-dye-streaks-down-face-after-my-cousin-vinny-performance

(https://img.thedailybeast.com/image/upload/c_crop,d_placeholder_euli9k,h_1439,w_2560,x_0,y_175/dpr_1.5/c_limit,w_1044/fl_lossy,q_auto/v1605810994/GettyImages-1229683394_s9pjyp)

Hence: Sweaty Clown Car
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on November 19, 2020, 04:07:35 PM
Quote from: Florestan on November 19, 2020, 01:05:40 PM
When it comes to politics, I am from Mars and my in-laws are from Venus, yet my relationship with them is excellent. The key to this is to never let politics stand in the way. We are not defined by whom we vote for, but by what what we do and how we behave. I hate everything and everyone my father-in-law stands for politically, and viceversa, yet we never had any irreconcilable conflict --- actually, we have always got along very fine. Life is larger than politics.

At one time I would agree with you but the situation has really deteriorated in the United States.

Whenever we visit relatives in North Carolina my wife and I are on pins and needles.  Many of them refer to us as those northern liberals.  My brother is always trying to pick fights with me. 

My brother has alienated both of my sons that they are no longer on speaking terms.  My oldest son is married to a Korean women and my my brother has made snide remarks about my grandchildren.  My youngest sons long time girl friend is Mexican and my brother has made remarks that it is sad that he could not hook up with a nice white girl.  The only reason I tolerate my brother's behavior is because my mother lives with him and I do not want to be cut off from her.

It has gotten so bad with my wife that between her sisters, nieces and nephews the only relative my wife still has a good relationship with is her brother. 

Whenever they try to start something my wife and I start talking about the weather.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 19, 2020, 04:15:21 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 19, 2020, 04:02:56 PM
Hence: Sweaty Clown Car

Stephen Sondheim called it years ago:

Isn't it rich?
Isn't it queer?
Losing my timing this late in my career
And where are the clowns?
Quick, send in the clowns
Don't bother
They're here
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on November 19, 2020, 04:20:02 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 19, 2020, 04:02:56 PM
Hence: Sweaty Clown Car

"Hey! I resent that!!!" - Jared Kushner

(https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NDvtE8ruqfNU3oi3p2k4YG.jpg)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 19, 2020, 04:33:15 PM
Quote from: T. D. on November 18, 2020, 07:06:01 AM
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/republicans-won-almost-every-election-where-redistricting-was-at-stake/ (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/republicans-won-almost-every-election-where-redistricting-was-at-stake/)

Joe Biden may have won the White House, but down-ballot races were much better for Republicans. In fact, the GOP's victories in state-level elections could pay dividends long after Biden leaves office, thanks to their influence over next year's redistricting process.

Every 10 years, after the census, congressional and state legislature districts are redrawn to account for population changes. This gives whoever is drawing the maps the power to maximize the number of districts that favor their party — a tactic known as gerrymandering. And as we wrote last month, the 2020 election represented the last chance for voters to weigh in on who would draw those maps. Both parties went into the election with a chance to draw more congressional districts than the other, but the end result was just about the best-case scenario for Republicans. As the map below shows, Republicans are set to control the redistricting of 188 congressional seats — or 43 percent of the entire House of Representatives. By contrast, Democrats will control the redistricting of, at most, 73 seats, or 17 percent.

Yes, with apologies to our Poju, the discussion on this podcast (https://podcast.thebulwark.com/brendan-buck-georgia-on-my-mind) underscores how the Democrats have not the least shade of a mandate to lurch left.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: bhodges on November 19, 2020, 04:36:22 PM
Quote from: arpeggio on November 19, 2020, 04:07:35 PM
At one time I would agree with you but the situation has really deteriorated in the United States.

Whenever we visit relatives in North Carolina my wife and I are on pins and needles.  Many of them refer to us as those northern liberals.  My brother is always trying to pick fights with me. 

My brother has alienated both of my sons that they are no longer on speaking terms.  My oldest son is married to a Korean women and my my brother has made snide remarks about my grandchildren.  My youngest sons long time girl friend is Mexican and my brother has made remarks that it is sad that he could not hook up with a nice white girl.  The only reason I tolerate my brothers behavior is because my mother lives with him and I do not want to be cut off from her.

Whenever they try to start something my wife and I start talking about the weather.

It has gotten so bad with my wife that between her sisters, nieces and nephews the only relative my wife still has a good relationship with is her brother.

Very sorry to hear this. If it's any consolation, based on my anecdotal evidence on social media and elsewhere, you have lots of company. I work with a 20-ish woman whose parents support T****. She barely speaks to them. In my own family, I have members who identify as Christian, but their behavior is about as un-Christian as can be imagined. They support T**** eagerly. Despite my making it clear that I would be amenable to conversations about any number of issues, they aren't interested. "It won't make any difference anyway."

--Bruce
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on November 19, 2020, 05:18:49 PM
Quote from: arpeggio on November 19, 2020, 04:07:35 PM
At one time I would agree with you but the situation has really deteriorated in the United States.

Whenever we visit relatives in North Carolina my wife and I are on pins and needles.  Many of them refer to us as those northern liberals.  My brother is always trying to pick fights with me. 

My brother has alienated both of my sons that they are no longer on speaking terms.  My oldest son is married to a Korean women and my my brother has made snide remarks about my grandchildren.  My youngest sons long time girl friend is Mexican and my brother has made remarks that it is sad that he could not hook up with a nice white girl.  The only reason I tolerate my brothers behavior is because my mother lives with him and I do not want to be cut off from her.

Whenever they try to start something my wife and I start talking about the weather.

It has gotten so bad with my wife that between her sisters, nieces and nephews the only relative my wife still has a good relationship with is her brother.

I have a similar situation, but it's not in regard to politics. Basically, it's just my parents and myself. My older brother and sister both have a horrible relationship with my dad. They'll regret not coming to see him one day. My sister wants to make up with my dad, but doesn't even bother coming over to mend the relationship --- actions always speak louder than words. My brother has basically cut himself off from the entire family, but to be honest, I couldn't be happier about that as he's always putting me down with some kind of hurtful, underhanded remark. Like, for example, the tv show Married... with Children was on when he was over one time and we were sitting on the couch watching it. Anyway, I made an innocent remark that Christina Applegate will always be remembered as Kelly Bundy and he looked at me for second and said "Well, you'll always be remembered for nothing." I fluffed it off at the time, but those kinds of comments do cut deep and by him saying this to me, he pretty much told me what he thought about me. After that, I didn't have much to do with him and, quite frankly, I'm over worrying about whether he'll come around and actually act like a decent human being again to me and treat me like his brother. That ship has sailed years ago. The holidays should be a reminder of good times and knowing you have people you can count on, but I don't look at them this way. They're more or less a reminder that my family will never be the same or be what it was when we were all younger. People change, but, unfortunately, they change for all the wrong reasons. If there's anything I'm thankful for, it's my parents. They have shown me nothing but support and have been there for every step of the way, so I, in return, have to return this support to them the best I can.

Anyway, I say forget those people in your life that bring you misery and hardship --- you simply don't need them. Focus on the people who do build you up, not tear you down. You'll be better off in the long-run.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on November 19, 2020, 05:28:40 PM
Quote from: arpeggio on November 19, 2020, 04:07:35 PM
At one time I would agree with you but the situation has really deteriorated in the United States.

Whenever we visit relatives in North Carolina my wife and I are on pins and needles.  Many of them refer to us as those northern liberals.  My brother is always trying to pick fights with me. 

My brother has alienated both of my sons that they are no longer on speaking terms.  My oldest son is married to a Korean women and my my brother has made snide remarks about my grandchildren.  My youngest sons long time girl friend is Mexican and my brother has made remarks that it is sad that he could not hook up with a nice white girl.  The only reason I tolerate my brothers behavior is because my mother lives with him and I do not want to be cut off from her.

Whenever they try to start something my wife and I start talking about the weather.

It has gotten so bad with my wife that between her sisters, nieces and nephews the only relative my wife still has a good relationship with is her brother.

I am so sorry to hear this. But I am not surprised. I see and hear similar things every day in the U.S.A.  Probably these people still live in the value structure before the Civil Rights, and they think that the other people changed and became un-American/un-Christian.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on November 19, 2020, 05:30:54 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 19, 2020, 04:33:15 PM
Yes, with apologies to our Poju, the discussion on this podcast (https://podcast.thebulwark.com/brendan-buck-georgia-on-my-mind) underscores how the Democrats have not the least shade of a mandate to lurch left.

Democrats probably would think they need some kind of "mandate" to enact progressive policies.  That's why Democrats suck.  Republicans declare a mandate no matter what the vote was and do whatever they were planning to do anyway.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 19, 2020, 06:35:35 PM
Quote from: Daverz on November 19, 2020, 05:30:54 PM
Democrats probably would think they need some kind of "mandate" to enact progressive policies.  That's why Democrats suck.  Republicans declare a mandate no matter what the vote was and do whatever they were planning to do anyway.

I see your point. Nevertheless, President Biden will have enough work with the pandemic for rather a piece.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 19, 2020, 06:43:45 PM
Quote from: Todd on November 16, 2020, 05:54:41 AM

It was also all but certain that Trump would steal the election.

Quote from: Todd on November 16, 2020, 03:51:22 PM
Despite what has been written on GMG, he did not try. 


     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 19, 2020, 06:55:55 PM
Not much in the way of acumen.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on November 19, 2020, 08:08:39 PM
Quote from: Daverz on November 19, 2020, 05:30:54 PM
Democrats probably would think they need some kind of "mandate" to enact progressive policies.  That's why Democrats suck.  Republicans declare a mandate no matter what the vote was and do whatever they were planning to do anyway.

In terms of percentage of votes, Biden has a bigger mandate than Carter, Reagan, or Clinton.

But a very slim majority in the House and at best a 50/50 Senate (if Ossoff and Warnock do the improbable) mean he'll have no real chance to use it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 20, 2020, 01:21:30 AM
Quote from: arpeggio on November 19, 2020, 04:07:35 PM
At one time I would agree with you but the situation has really deteriorated in the United States.

Whenever we visit relatives in North Carolina my wife and I are on pins and needles.  Many of them refer to us as those northern liberals.  My brother is always trying to pick fights with me. 

My brother has alienated both of my sons that they are no longer on speaking terms.  My oldest son is married to a Korean women and my my brother has made snide remarks about my grandchildren.  My youngest sons long time girl friend is Mexican and my brother has made remarks that it is sad that he could not hook up with a nice white girl.  The only reason I tolerate my brother's behavior is because my mother lives with him and I do not want to be cut off from her.

It has gotten so bad with my wife that between her sisters, nieces and nephews the only relative my wife still has a good relationship with is her brother. 

Whenever they try to start something my wife and I start talking about the weather.

I'm sorry to hear that, it must be very difficult for you.

We had a similar period in Romania in the early 1990s, immediately after the fall of the communist regime. Whole families were sharply divided along political lines and relationships were cold or even broken altogether. Nowadays, though, the situation is normalized.

AFAIC, politics it's not worth it.




Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 20, 2020, 02:08:36 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 19, 2020, 06:55:55 PM
Not much in the way of acumen.

It's called alternative facts.

Even while Trump is trying to steal the election, that and playing golf are his only lame duck pursuits, you blithely say you own the facts and ridicule anyone who reads a newspaper ("failing") and say Trump is not even trying to steal the election.

In case of credibility loss start ten Beethoven topics.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 20, 2020, 02:16:47 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on November 19, 2020, 05:18:49 PM
I made an innocent remark that Christina Applegate will always be remembered as Kelly Bundy and he looked at me for second and said "Well, you'll always be remembered for nothing."

Fprgive me for saying it but your brother is a jerk.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 20, 2020, 02:21:32 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 19, 2020, 01:05:40 PM
The key to this is to never let politics stand in the way. We are not defined by whom we vote for, but by what what we do and how we behave. [...]  Life is larger than politics.

voting is an act, not just some form of fantasy; it's what you do, and it has consequences.

in general your story is applicable, but not if people are voting for a president who seperates kids from their parents and puts them in cages and all the other awful things.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 20, 2020, 02:29:30 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on November 19, 2020, 05:18:49 PM

Anyway, I say forget those people in your life that bring you misery and hardship --- you simply don't need them. Focus on the people who do build you up, not tear you down. You'll be better off in the long-run.

As any psychotherapist can tell you, one's close family is a source of pain to many people.

You can spend decades trying to make it better, but sometimes it just doesn't work out, because there's too much pain and resentment and mysterious motives you'll never untangle.

Focus on people who like and love you for who you are. Life is too short.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 20, 2020, 03:09:04 AM
Quote from: Herman on November 20, 2020, 02:21:32 AM
voting is an act, not just some form of fantasy; it's what you do, and it has consequences.

in general your story is applicable, but not if people are voting for a president who seperates kids from their parents and puts them in cages and all the other awful things.

Presidents come and go. Trump will soon be history. A permanently damaged relationship with one's family, though, is a source of frustration, anger and/or resentment. Not good for the health of anyone involved.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 20, 2020, 03:25:31 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 20, 2020, 03:09:04 AM
Presidents come and go. Trump will soon be history.

Yep, but all the damage he did takes decades to repair.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 20, 2020, 03:47:25 AM
Quote from: arpeggio on November 19, 2020, 12:42:10 PM
I do not mean this to be as a criticism of you personally.  Although we disagree on some things you are a very knowledge member.

At least you are being respectful.   0:)

Quote from: arpeggio on November 19, 2020, 12:42:10 PMYour suggestions sound reasonable if one is trying to carry on a discussion with a rational person.  The vast majority of Trumpsters I have met live in an alternant reality where all Democrats hate America and are evil.

As I said, the steps I listed are really hard to make, but what else can you do but try? The alternative is not trying and letting things be as they are and even deterioating further. A certain portion of the country will live in alternant reality no matter what, but as long as they are in the minority and there's democracy it's ok. In Finland about 20 % of the population is "out there", but they are small enough group, althou I wish these people didn't exist at all.

Quote from: arpeggio on November 19, 2020, 12:42:10 PMI do not see how we can resolve differences with people who deny Darwin and scientific reality.

What if Hillary had win in 2016? Trumpists would not be the cult they are today. 70.000 votes in the rust belt made Trump the president. If you can "convert" just 1 % of the population to follow reason you are in a better place.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 20, 2020, 04:08:58 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 19, 2020, 01:05:40 PM
When it comes to politics, I am from Mars and my in-laws are from Venus, yet my relationship with them is excellent. The key to this is to never let politics stand in the way. We are not defined by whom we vote for, but by what what we do and how we behave. I hate everything and everyone my father-in-law stands for politically, and viceversa, yet we never had any irreconcilable conflict --- actually, we have always got along very fine. Life is larger than politics.
I am happy for you Florestan; glad to see that both parties can set that aside and still care about each other.  :)

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 20, 2020, 04:13:47 AM
Quote from: arpeggio on November 19, 2020, 04:07:35 PM
At one time I would agree with you but the situation has really deteriorated in the United States.

Whenever we visit relatives in North Carolina my wife and I are on pins and needles.  Many of them refer to us as those northern liberals.  My brother is always trying to pick fights with me. 

My brother has alienated both of my sons that they are no longer on speaking terms.  My oldest son is married to a Korean women and my my brother has made snide remarks about my grandchildren.  My youngest sons long time girl friend is Mexican and my brother has made remarks that it is sad that he could not hook up with a nice white girl.  The only reason I tolerate my brother's behavior is because my mother lives with him and I do not want to be cut off from her.

It has gotten so bad with my wife that between her sisters, nieces and nephews the only relative my wife still has a good relationship with is her brother. 

Whenever they try to start something my wife and I start talking about the weather.
I'm so sorry to read this and wish that I could offer some words of wisdom and of comfort.  That's very brave and loving of you to willingly enter into that toxic environment to spend time with your mother.

All the best,

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 20, 2020, 04:48:58 AM
What happened to Russia?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: flyingdutchman on November 20, 2020, 04:49:12 AM
Quote from: arpeggio on November 19, 2020, 04:07:35 PM
At one time I would agree with you but the situation has really deteriorated in the United States.

Whenever we visit relatives in North Carolina my wife and I are on pins and needles.  Many of them refer to us as those northern liberals.  My brother is always trying to pick fights with me. 

My brother has alienated both of my sons that they are no longer on speaking terms.  My oldest son is married to a Korean women and my my brother has made snide remarks about my grandchildren.  My youngest sons long time girl friend is Mexican and my brother has made remarks that it is sad that he could not hook up with a nice white girl.  The only reason I tolerate my brother's behavior is because my mother lives with him and I do not want to be cut off from her.

It has gotten so bad with my wife that between her sisters, nieces and nephews the only relative my wife still has a good relationship with is her brother. 

Whenever they try to start something my wife and I start talking about the weather.

Very sad to hear. My wife is Japanese and our kids are half caucasian/half Japanese. My own family has been respectful and my aunt and step-father who have long since died and grew up during the time of war with Japan had nothing but love and respect for her when they lived. I was/am blessed. My wife is a wonder and she's dealt with racism in the community and at work, but NEVER with my family. She works as an RN and has dealt with abusive behavior mostly from white patients, but keeps her humor and grace about her.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 20, 2020, 04:59:28 AM
Quote from: flyingdutchman on November 20, 2020, 04:49:12 AM
She works as an RN and has dealt with abusive behavior mostly from white patients, but keeps her humor and grace about her.

Wow, on the west coast?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Sterna on November 20, 2020, 05:31:32 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 20, 2020, 04:48:58 AM
What happened to Russia?

https://www.themoscowtimes.com/
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on November 20, 2020, 05:59:43 AM
Quote from: T. D. on November 19, 2020, 02:56:13 PM
Rudy Ghouliani staged a public meltdown. Literally.  :laugh:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/rudy-giulianis-hair-dye-streaks-down-face-after-my-cousin-vinny-performance

(https://img.thedailybeast.com/image/upload/c_crop,d_placeholder_euli9k,h_1439,w_2560,x_0,y_175/dpr_1.5/c_limit,w_1044/fl_lossy,q_auto/v1605810994/GettyImages-1229683394_s9pjyp)




This photo is sort of more balanced:
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on November 20, 2020, 06:08:20 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 20, 2020, 02:16:47 AM
Forgive me for saying it but your brother is a jerk.

No need to forgive you for quoting the truth. He is a grade A jerk.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on November 20, 2020, 06:10:06 AM
Quote from: Herman on November 20, 2020, 02:29:30 AM
As any psychotherapist can tell you, one's close family is a source of pain to many people.

You can spend decades trying to make it better, but sometimes it just doesn't work out, because there's too much pain and resentment and mysterious motives you'll never untangle.

Focus on people who like and love you for who you are. Life is too short.

It certainly can be, but as you said, life's too short to worry about all that --- a person should be around people who make them happy.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 20, 2020, 06:18:36 AM
Quote from: Sterna on November 20, 2020, 05:31:32 AM
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/

     There's a nice bit on how Russians react to The Queen's Gambit.

     The Trumptator may or may not touch base with Vladdy, that's failing news we haven't yet read. Truly, though, why would Putin want to mess with something that pays off so handsomely? Let it be, I say.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Sterna on November 20, 2020, 06:29:51 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 20, 2020, 06:18:36 AM
     There's a nice bit on how Russians react to The Queen's Gambit.
[...]

Indeed.
The final lines:
The problem is not that "The Queen's Gambit" portrays Russians incorrectly — it doesn't. The fact is simply that Russians always find a way to be dissatisfied, even when nothing is wrong.
When I read that, I immediately thought: Queen's Gambit Declined. ;)

Quote from: drogulus on November 20, 2020, 06:18:36 AM
     The Trumptator may or may not touch base with Vladdy, that's failing news we haven't yet read. Truly, though, why would Putin want to mess with something that pays off so handsomely? Let it be, I say.

I was only trying to help another forum member, who seemed to be lost a bit.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 20, 2020, 06:54:28 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 20, 2020, 06:18:36 AM
     There's a nice bit on how Russians react to The Queen's Gambit.

     The Trumptator may or may not touch base with Vladdy, that's failing news we haven't yet read. Truly, though, why would Putin want to mess with something that pays off so handsomely? Let it be, I say.

He's defiitely enjoying the hands-free appliance.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 20, 2020, 06:55:42 AM
Quote from: Sterna on November 20, 2020, 06:29:51 AM
Indeed.
The final lines:
The problem is not that "The Queen's Gambit" portrays Russians incorrectly — it doesn't. The fact is simply that Russians always find a way to be dissatisfied, even when nothing is wrong.
When I read that, I immediately thought: Queen's Gambit Declined. ;)

Well played, sieur!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 20, 2020, 07:02:43 AM
Quote from: arpeggio on November 19, 2020, 04:07:35 PM
At one time I would agree with you but the situation has really deteriorated in the United States.

Whenever we visit relatives in North Carolina my wife and I are on pins and needles.  Many of them refer to us as those northern liberals.  My brother is always trying to pick fights with me. 

My brother has alienated both of my sons that they are no longer on speaking terms.  My oldest son is married to a Korean women and my my brother has made snide remarks about my grandchildren.  My youngest sons long time girl friend is Mexican and my brother has made remarks that it is sad that he could not hook up with a nice white girl.  The only reason I tolerate my brother's behavior is because my mother lives with him and I do not want to be cut off from her.

It has gotten so bad with my wife that between her sisters, nieces and nephews the only relative my wife still has a good relationship with is her brother. 

Whenever they try to start something my wife and I start talking about the weather.
My sister turned from a Biden voter to fanatically believing that COVID is part of a communist conspiracy to take over the U.S. She's anti-Vax, anti-mask and thinks Trump won. She's pushes this shockingly far, haranguing us with dire emotional messages of doom. She writes things like, "I'm begging you," and "wake up." I don't live in the U.S. I can't do much practically. My parents are octogenarian Jews in the last years of reasonably good health. It's really sad. ETA: I just give my parents background because they're not the kind of people you'd bother with politics. They're not political aside from having become more liberal as members of the family came out and adopted biracial children. That's the only thing that's made them more direct about politics. Even if I believed some conspiracy theory, I'd know better than to bother them with it - especially at their age. My sister is making this a condition of their relationship.
I will say this: she's terrified. Imagine believing what she believes.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 20, 2020, 07:05:15 AM
     Making the Most of the Coming Biden Boom (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/19/opinion/joe-biden-economy.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage)

What held recovery back after 2008? Most obviously, the bursting of the housing bubble left households with high levels of debt and greatly weakened balance sheets that took years to recover.

This time, however, households entered the pandemic slump with much lower debt. Net worth took a brief hit but quickly recovered. And there's probably a lot of pent-up demand: Americans who remained employed did a huge amount of saving in quarantine, accumulating a lot of liquid assets.


     The Krugster isn't telling the story quite the way he did a few years back when he correctly diagnosed the weak recovery as a demand shortfall. That analysis didn't just highlight the savings deficit, it explained it. Now he foregrounds the housing bubble problem without mentioning this vital piece of the picture.

     That very much aside, government action to flood the zone with savings should have the effect he sees. Points are deducted for mentioning the Fed.

Quote from: drogulus on November 08, 2020, 02:46:46 PM
     A 'growth bomb' is brewing in the US with consumers sitting on $2.5 trillion in savings — and it's poised to give the economy a huge boost, one Wall Street chief strategist says (https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/a-growth-bomb-is-brewing-in-the-us-with-consumers-sitting-on-dollar25-trillion-in-savings-%E2%80%94-and-its-poised-to-give-the-economy-a-huge-boost-one-wall-street-chief-strategist-says/ar-BB1aO67H)

     Yup.....this happened in the '20s after the '21 depression, and again in the '30s after the GD, and once again in the '50s after the WWII savings bomb. The "debt bomb" becomes the growth bomb.

     Bubble shmubble.....
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on November 20, 2020, 07:08:53 AM
Quote from: milk on November 20, 2020, 07:02:43 AM

My sister turned from a Biden voter to fanatically believing that COVID is part of a communist conspiracy to take over the U.S. She's anti-Vax, anti-mask and thinks Trump won. She's pushes this shockingly far, haranguing us with dire emotional messages of doom. She writes things like, "I'm begging you," and "wake up." I don't live in the U.S. I can't do much practically. My parents are octogenarian Jews in the last years of reasonably good health. It's really sad.

There's extremism on both sides of the political spectrum, but to anyone who disbelieves COVID and refuses to, at the very least, to wear a mask around other people is a huge part of the current health crisis of this country. Masks should be mandated and I agree with what President Joe Biden said, "Wearing a mask isn't a political statement."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 20, 2020, 07:14:16 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on November 20, 2020, 07:08:53 AM
There's extremism on both sides of the political spectrum, but to anyone who disbelieves COVID and refuses to, at the very least, to wear a mask around other people is a huge part of the current health crisis of this country. Masks should be mandated and I agree with what President Joe Biden said, "Wearing a mask isn't a political statement."
I agree 100% about extremism on both sides and the masks. yes. I live in Japan. Masks were a way of life even before this. Japan isn't out of the woods yet either but it's still got on much better than Europe or the U.S. Everyone in Japan wears a masks from when they step out of their houses to when they come home. You can even see Japanese people driving in their cars alone with their masks on.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 20, 2020, 07:21:16 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on November 20, 2020, 07:08:53 AM
There's extremism on both sides of the political spectrum

     The extreme left is outside the Dem party and hates it. As much as AOC wants to identify herself as a socialist, she's a fairly standard issue left Dem in programmatic terms.

     These days the word socialist means you want things other people want, only with more oomph. AOC wants economic measures "no I mean really". If that's socialism, we live in an almost socialist country without lifting an ideological finger. I don't have to like how terms are unmoored from their historic roots. Maybe I should get with the times. I won't though.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: flyingdutchman on November 20, 2020, 07:48:31 AM
Quote from: Herman on November 20, 2020, 04:59:28 AM
Wow, on the west coast?

Yep, even on the west coast. Portland, and especially if you go up into Southwest Washington state can be extremely close-minded. In a town we live in, she was called monkey by a white guy as she left the Dollar store once. In the hospital she works in a white person refused to be treated by here and demanded that a white nurse help her.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: flyingdutchman on November 20, 2020, 07:51:04 AM
Quote from: Dowder on November 20, 2020, 05:00:25 AM
Bah humbug. Biden wins the popular vote due to California, the diverse state with the highest concentration of illegal immigrants, foreigners and left wing nutjobs. I don't think the rest of America is anything like the golden state for its whacky one party liberalism.

He won the popular vote pretty much everywhere with a 6 million win difference.  That's not all California. Further, his election wins in states that Trump "won" far outdistance his totals in those states.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: flyingdutchman on November 20, 2020, 07:55:56 AM
Quote from: milk on November 20, 2020, 07:02:43 AM

My sister turned from a Biden voter to fanatically believing that COVID is part of a communist conspiracy to take over the U.S. She's anti-Vax, anti-mask and thinks Trump won. She's pushes this shockingly far, haranguing us with dire emotional messages of doom. She writes things like, "I'm begging you," and "wake up." I don't live in the U.S. I can't do much practically. My parents are octogenarian Jews in the last years of reasonably good health. It's really sad. ETA: I just give my parents background because they're not the kind of people you'd bother with politics. They're not political aside from having become more liberal as members of the family came out and adopted biracial children. That's the only thing that's made them more direct about politics. Even if I believed some conspiracy theory, I'd know better than to bother them with it - especially at their age. My sister is making this a condition of their relationship.
I will say this: she's terrified. Imagine believing what she believes.

Wow. She turned from being a Biden voter to being a Trump voter based on only that?  My god. It is interesting, however, to note that the virus mutation that came to the US came to us mostly via Europe. Trump stopped some people coming from China, but his decision to issue the "blockade" on Europe last year only pushed frantic people to come back from Europe bringing the virus with them.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on November 20, 2020, 08:12:06 AM
Quote from: flyingdutchman on November 20, 2020, 04:49:12 AM
Very sad to hear. My wife is Japanese and our kids are half caucasian/half Japanese. My own family has been respectful and my aunt and step-father who have long since died and grew up during the time of war with Japan had nothing but love and respect for her when they lived. I was/am blessed. My wife is a wonder and she's dealt with racism in the community and at work, but NEVER with my family. She works as an RN and has dealt with abusive behavior mostly from white patients, but keeps her humor and grace about her.

Sorry to hear about it. Couples of Asian male and Caucasian female may even receive harsher and more explicit hatred and threats.  But anyway, I have seen so many abuses against non-whites and interracial couples in the nation.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on November 20, 2020, 08:53:13 AM
Quote from: milk on November 20, 2020, 07:14:16 AM
I agree 100% about extremism on both sides and the masks. yes. I live in Japan. Masks were a way of life even before this. Japan isn't out of the woods yet either but it's still got on much better than Europe or the U.S. Everyone in Japan wears a masks from when they step out of their houses to when they come home. You can even see Japanese people driving in their cars alone with their masks on.

Maybe I should move to Japan --- it sounds like my kind of place. :)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: flyingdutchman on November 20, 2020, 09:14:18 AM
Lived in Japan for 12 years and yep, way of life.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on November 20, 2020, 09:19:42 AM
Quote from: flyingdutchman on November 20, 2020, 09:14:18 AM
Lived in Japan for 12 years and yep, way of life.

8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on November 20, 2020, 10:06:59 AM
People with professional degrees may like living there. The people with, or without, bachelors degrees are divided.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 20, 2020, 10:15:32 AM
Anyone else here concerned about the 4 p.m. meeting today (Friday) between the two Michigan election officials and Pres. Trump at the White House?

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on November 20, 2020, 10:19:14 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 20, 2020, 10:15:32 AM
Anyone else here concerned about the 4 p.m. meeting today (Friday) between the two Michigan election officials and Pres. Trump at the White House?

PD

Not really. Acceptance of defeat is a long and painful road for some people, especially when they're a billionaire.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 20, 2020, 10:22:23 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on November 20, 2020, 07:08:53 AM
There's extremism on both sides of the political spectrum, but to anyone who disbelieves COVID and refuses to, at the very least, to wear a mask around other people is a huge part of the current health crisis of this country. Masks should be mandated and I agree with what President Joe Biden said, "Wearing a mask isn't a political statement."

Science-deniers gonna deny.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on November 20, 2020, 10:23:30 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 20, 2020, 10:22:23 AM
Science-deniers gonna deny.

QFT.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 20, 2020, 10:26:29 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 20, 2020, 10:15:32 AM
Anyone else here concerned about the 4 p.m. meeting today (Friday) between the two Michigan election officials and Pres. Trump at the White House?

PD

Yes, very much so. I have been following the story for days (they opposed certification, then approved, then tried to renege on approval under pressure from Cheeto Mussolini). Was alarmed at yesterday's announcement that the officials were being summoned to the WH.
I fear this will begin Cheeto's campaign to have Republicans switch states' Electoral votes.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 20, 2020, 10:37:56 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on November 20, 2020, 10:19:14 AM
Not really. Acceptance of defeat is a long and painful road for some people, especially when they're a billionaire.

I found some more info here.  I doesn't sound like legally they could change the electors:

"Under Michigan law, its legislature is barred from appointing its own electors who are different from the slate of electors of the presidential candidate who won the popular vote in the state."

This is the whole article:  https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/20/michigan-lawmakers-to-meet-trump-amid-vote-certification-anger.html

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 20, 2020, 10:41:19 AM
How many presidential elections have faithless electors changed, I wonder.  Actually, I don't wonder.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 20, 2020, 10:56:48 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 20, 2020, 10:37:56 AM
I found some more info here.  I doesn't sound like legally they could change the electors:

"Under Michigan law, its legislature is barred from appointing its own electors who are different from the slate of electors of the presidential candidate who won the popular vote in the state."

This is the whole article:  https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/20/michigan-lawmakers-to-meet-trump-amid-vote-certification-anger.html

PD

If they've been summoned to the WH, CM is definitely gonna hold a press conference. No doubt scheduled for after the markets close, probably in the 5 PM area.
I've no idea about what will be said in the press conference, but likely something that Cheeto deems significant. One thing I can say with certainty: CM's hair dye will hold up better than Ghouliani's did yesterday...

(https://image.cnbcfm.com/api/v1/image/106800110-1605875495705-gettyimages-1229689770-ELECTION.jpeg?v=1605895645&w=740&h=416)

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 20, 2020, 11:08:51 AM
Quote from: T. D. on November 20, 2020, 10:56:48 AM
If they've been summoned to the WH, CM is definitely gonna hold a press conference. No doubt scheduled for after the markets close, probably in the 5 PM area.
I've no idea about what will be said in the press conference, but likely something that Cheeto deems significant. One thing I can say with certainty: CM's hair dye will hold up better than Ghouliani's did yesterday...

(https://image.cnbcfm.com/api/v1/image/106800110-1605875495705-gettyimages-1229689770-ELECTION.jpeg?v=1605895645&w=740&h=416)
I'm a bit confused by this article:  https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-called-republican-election-official-in-wayne-county-michigan-who-initially-voted-against-certifying-results/ar-BB1baFQy?pfr=1

"On Tuesday, when the board first took up a motion to certify the county's election results, the vote came out 2-2 — deadlocked along partisan lines, with the Republicans opposing certification.

Palmer offered a compromise: "I would be open to a motion to certify communities other than the city of Detroit."

An hours-long public comment period followed where the Republican members of the board were called racist for disenfranchising hundreds of thousands of Black voters.

At the end of the meeting, Jonathan Kinloch, the Democratic vice chair, offered a resolution to certify the county's election results that called on Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson to conduct a comprehensive audit of the county's precincts that recorded unexplained discrepancies between the number of ballots recorded as cast and the number of ballots counted."

"The board unanimously supported Kinloch's resolution."

"Throughout the meeting, Trump continued his quest for victories in states that he lost at the ballot box, making dubious claims to a procedural win in Michigan. He falsely claimed in a tweet that "Michigan just refused to certify the election results." Trump appeared to have confused the Board of State Canvassers with the Wayne County Board of Canvassers. The members of the state board are scheduled to meet Monday to vote on certifying Michigan's election results."

Sooo...o.k., if I'm understanding this correctly, the state board will be voting Monday on certifying Michigan's results, but how can they do this without the Wayne County board certifying at their end?  Or will there be discussion between the two boards on Monday (with what they, the state, found re any big discrepancies, etc. at their end) with then the Wayne County (hopefully) certifying things at their end and then the certification at the state level?  Has Wayne county finally certified things (for sure this time)?

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 20, 2020, 11:12:36 AM
Quote from: T. D. on November 20, 2020, 10:26:29 AM
Yes, very much so. I have been following the story for days (they opposed certification, then approved, then tried to renege on approval under pressure from Cheeto Mussolini). Was alarmed at yesterday's announcement that the officials were being summoned to the WH.
I fear this will begin Cheeto's campaign to have Republicans switch states' Electoral votes.

He'll place the Michigan officials in danger of committing a felony.  Of course, Trump regularly consorts with felons, so his blinders are securely fastened.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on November 20, 2020, 11:17:27 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 20, 2020, 10:37:56 AM
I found some more info here.  I doesn't sound like legally they could change the electors:

"Under Michigan law, its legislature is barred from appointing its own electors who are different from the slate of electors of the presidential candidate who won the popular vote in the state."

This is the whole article:  https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/20/michigan-lawmakers-to-meet-trump-amid-vote-certification-anger.html

PD

Trump is going to have to be escorted out of the White House. There's no question about it. Whatever 'legacy' he had before election night has now been rewritten. He will go down as one of the poorest presidents in our recent history. Hell, James Buchanan and Franklin Pierce actually have better legacies than Trump and that's not saying much! ;D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 20, 2020, 11:20:21 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 20, 2020, 10:15:32 AM
Anyone else here concerned about the 4 p.m. meeting today (Friday) between the two Michigan election officials and Pres. Trump at the White House?

PD

I am. Not much, but the "it can't happen here" thought, doesn't apply anymore.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 20, 2020, 11:21:17 AM
Observation of the Day: "A clown with a flamethrower still has a flamethrower."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on November 20, 2020, 11:21:37 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 20, 2020, 11:21:17 AM
Observation of the Day: "A clown with a flamethrower still has a flamethrower."

:laugh:
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 20, 2020, 11:25:40 AM
I'm not just concerned about what these MI election officials will do, because it seems too late to do anything.

However, there is a lot of violence brewing under the surface in MI, and Trump wouldn't bat an eye at pushing these crazy rednecks over the edge, if he doesn't get his way.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 20, 2020, 11:29:47 AM
Quote from: T. D. on November 20, 2020, 10:26:29 AM
Yes, very much so. I have been following the story for days (they opposed certification, then approved, then tried to renege on approval under pressure from Cheeto Mussolini). Was alarmed at yesterday's announcement that the officials were being summoned to the WH.
I fear this will begin Cheeto's campaign to have Republicans switch states' Electoral votes.
T.D.  I had made a post after years due to some confusion at my end....but you might have missed it or not seen it yet.
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 20, 2020, 11:08:51 AM
I'm a bit confused by this article:  https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-called-republican-election-official-in-wayne-county-michigan-who-initially-voted-against-certifying-results/ar-BB1baFQy?pfr=1

"On Tuesday, when the board first took up a motion to certify the county's election results, the vote came out 2-2 — deadlocked along partisan lines, with the Republicans opposing certification.

Palmer offered a compromise: "I would be open to a motion to certify communities other than the city of Detroit."

An hours-long public comment period followed where the Republican members of the board were called racist for disenfranchising hundreds of thousands of Black voters.

At the end of the meeting, Jonathan Kinloch, the Democratic vice chair, offered a resolution to certify the county's election results that called on Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson to conduct a comprehensive audit of the county's precincts that recorded unexplained discrepancies between the number of ballots recorded as cast and the number of ballots counted."

"The board unanimously supported Kinloch's resolution."

"Throughout the meeting, Trump continued his quest for victories in states that he lost at the ballot box, making dubious claims to a procedural win in Michigan. He falsely claimed in a tweet that "Michigan just refused to certify the election results." Trump appeared to have confused the Board of State Canvassers with the Wayne County Board of Canvassers. The members of the state board are scheduled to meet Monday to vote on certifying Michigan's election results."

Sooo...o.k., if I'm understanding this correctly, the state board will be voting Monday on certifying Michigan's results, but how can they do this without the Wayne County board certifying at their end?  Or will there be discussion between the two boards on Monday (with what they, the state, found re any big discrepancies, etc. at their end) with then the Wayne County (hopefully) certifying things at their end and then the certification at the state level?  Has Wayne county finally certified things (for sure this time)?

PD
Since you have been following this closely, perhaps you know the answer?  I guess my other question, thinking about it, did the 'asking to have their votes rescinded' count?  Just trying to figure out what is going to happen from here (see the above comments/questions by yours truly)?

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 20, 2020, 11:30:35 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on November 20, 2020, 11:17:27 AM
Trump is going to have to be escorted out of the White House. There's no question about it. Whatever 'legacy' he had before election night has now been rewritten. He will go down as one of the poorest presidents in our recent history. Hell, James Buchanan and Franklin Pierce actually have better legacies than Trump and that's not saying much! ;D

Warren Gamaliel Harding is the benchmark I've always thought of. But his legacy is orders of magnitude better than CM's.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 20, 2020, 11:34:23 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 20, 2020, 11:29:47 AM
T.D.  I had made a post after years due to some confusion at my end....but you might have missed it or not seen it yet.Since you have been following this closely, perhaps you know the answer?  I guess my other question, thinking about it, did the 'asking to have their votes rescinded' count?  Just trying to figure out what is going to happen from here (see the above comments/questions by yours truly)?

PD

An article I saw yesterday cited Michigan officials definitively stating that there was no legal mechanism for them to rescind their votes.  Can't recall the source, but Bloomberg and CNBC are the sites I follow.

Here's another link. Google will yield more.

https://www.mlive.com/public-interest/2020/11/wayne-county-republicans-cant-rescind-their-votes-to-certify-election-says-secretary-of-state.html

But I fully expect Cheeto to challenge this.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 20, 2020, 11:37:50 AM
Quote from: Herman on November 20, 2020, 11:25:40 AM
I'm not just concerned about what these MI election officials will do, because it seems too late to do anything.

However, there is a lot of violence brewing under the surface in MI, and Trump wouldn't bat an eye at pushing these crazy rednecks over the edge, if he doesn't get his way.
I care because it says a lot 1) that the voters in Detroit have their votes counted and included; 2) what the higher powers-that-be try to do to the electoral college in their state (a constitutional scholar in Harvard thinks that even the meeting between the Republican House and Senate members and Pres. Trump is illegal); and 3) How more of this nonsense (to put it politely) is undermining people's belief in our democratic institutions and the whole electoral process and that their votes matter.

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 20, 2020, 11:40:12 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 20, 2020, 11:37:50 AM3) How more of this nonsense (to put it politely) is undermining people's belief in our democratic institutions and the whole electoral process and that their votes matter.


The 2020 election had the highest turnout ever, and the highest turnout rate since 1900.  The opposite of your fear just occurred.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 20, 2020, 11:42:34 AM
Quote from: T. D. on November 20, 2020, 11:34:23 AM
An article I saw yesterday cited Michigan officials definitively stating that there was no legal mechanism for them to rescind their votes.  Can't recall the source, but Bloomberg and CNBC are the sites I follow.

Here's another link. Google will yield more.

https://www.mlive.com/public-interest/2020/11/wayne-county-republicans-cant-rescind-their-votes-to-certify-election-says-secretary-of-state.html

But I fully expect Cheeto to challenge this.

He'll lean on them, and the brain trust maintains that this is not an attempt to steal the election.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 20, 2020, 11:44:32 AM
Quote from: T. D. on November 20, 2020, 11:34:23 AM
An article I saw yesterday cited Michigan officials definitively stating that there was no legal mechanism for them to rescind their votes.  Can't recall the source, but Bloomberg and CNBC are the sites I follow.

Here's another link. Google will yield more.

https://www.mlive.com/public-interest/2020/11/wayne-county-republicans-cant-rescind-their-votes-to-certify-election-says-secretary-of-state.html

But I fully expect Cheeto to challenge this.
Thanks!  That was a helpful link.  For what its worth, I don't subscribe to Bloomberg, so I can only read X-number of articles a month.

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 20, 2020, 11:49:18 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 20, 2020, 11:44:32 AM
Thanks!  That was a helpful link.  For what its worth, I don't subscribe to Bloomberg, so I can only read X-number of articles a month.

PD

I used to work on Wall St., where Bloomberg is an essential data/information source. It's by far the best source of financial news, and I like their reporting in other areas. CNBC was a fixture on trading floors, and I suppose that's why I still follow them.
Bloomberg News subscription is around $35 / month, which I won't do. But I took advantage of a 3 months @ $0.99 per deal a couple of months ago, to get all the election stories.
They often run 3 month promotions, I've seen $0.99 and $1.99 per.
[Disclaimer: I have no connection whatsoever with Bloomberg News.]
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 20, 2020, 11:53:12 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 20, 2020, 11:40:12 AM

The 2020 election had the highest turnout ever, and the highest turnout rate since 1900.  The opposite of your fear just occurred.
What I'm talking about is, in particular, is the post-election comments, lawsuits, continually stating that they have had the election stolen--without any proof, allegations of fraud, etc., etc....trying to have people's votes not count (from those who went to the polls, or mailed in or dropped off absentee votes--including from military members/spouses, and people concerned about Covid and not wanting to go to the polls)...the whole enchilada so to speak.

And who knows, maybe even more people would have either gone to the polls or mailed in ballots if Pres. Trump hadn't gone on and on about mail-in ballots = fraud?

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 20, 2020, 11:54:50 AM
Quote from: T. D. on November 20, 2020, 11:49:18 AM
I used to work on Wall St., where Bloomberg is an essential data/information source. It's by far the best source of financial news, and I like their reporting in other areas. CNBC was a fixture on trading floors, and I suppose that's why I still follow them.
Bloomberg News subscription is around $35 / month, which I won't do. But I took advantage of a 3 months @ $0.99 per deal a couple of months ago, to get all the election stories.
They often run 3 month promotions, I've seen $0.99 and $1.99 per.
[Disclaimer: I have no connection whatsoever with Bloomberg News.]
Thank you for the information.   :)

Best wishes,

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 20, 2020, 12:10:54 PM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 20, 2020, 11:53:12 AM
What I'm talking about is, in particular, is the post-election comments, lawsuits, continually stating that they have had the election stolen--without any proof, allegations of fraud, etc., etc....trying to have people's votes not count (from those who went to the polls, or mailed in or dropped off absentee votes--including from military members/spouses, and people concerned about Covid and not wanting to go to the polls)...the whole enchilada so to speak.

And who knows, maybe even more people would have either gone to the polls or mailed in ballots if Pres. Trump hadn't gone on and on about mail-in ballots = fraud?

PD


On the evidence, Trump's divisive demeanor increased voter participation rather than depressed it. 

If voter turnout declines in 2022, it will not be because of Trump's post election proclamations.  Those will be forgotten by all but self-styled "high information" voters - ie, hyper-partisans.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 20, 2020, 12:25:49 PM
Quote from: Todd on November 20, 2020, 12:10:54 PM

On the evidence, Trump's divisive demeanor increased voter participation rather than depressed it. 

If voter turnout declines in 2022, it will not be because of Trump's post election proclamations.  Those will be forgotten by all but self-styled "high information" voters - ie, hyper-partisans.
No, I think that overall, more people came out because it they felt like it was an important election.  That said, perhaps some people were afraid of voter intimidation and didn't vote or for other reasons.  We'll never know.  That said, I still think that Pres. Trump has done a heck of a lot of harm to not just people's perceptions of whether or not their votes truly count, but about feeling like the election was rigged (despite no evidence), corruption in politics (by some on both sides)...and so much more.  We're a divided nation and his lies have only made things so much worse:  that's maybe the worst thing of all.

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on November 20, 2020, 12:32:10 PM
Quote from: T. D. on November 20, 2020, 10:26:29 AM
Yes, very much so. I have been following the story for days (they opposed certification, then approved, then tried to renege on approval under pressure from Cheeto Mussolini). Was alarmed at yesterday's announcement that the officials were being summoned to the WH.
I fear this will begin Cheeto's campaign to have Republicans switch states' Electoral votes.

For purposes of clarification, Trump did a phone call to the two local officials, but the men going to the WH today are the ranking members of the legislature. They are GOPs. Three of them were invited, but the Speaker of the House declined the invitation.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 20, 2020, 12:48:09 PM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 20, 2020, 12:25:49 PMNo, I think that overall, more people came out because it they felt like it was an important election.


And the reason it was important was because of Trump.  It was a referendum on his presidency.  He lost.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 20, 2020, 01:45:41 PM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 20, 2020, 11:53:12 AM
What I'm talking about is, in particular, is the post-election comments, lawsuits, continually stating that they have had the election stolen--without any proof, allegations of fraud, etc., etc....trying to have people's votes not count (from those who went to the polls, or mailed in or dropped off absentee votes--including from military members/spouses, and people concerned about Covid and not wanting to go to the polls)...the whole enchilada so to speak.

And who knows, maybe even more people would have either gone to the polls or mailed in ballots if Pres. Trump hadn't gone on and on about mail-in ballots = fraud?

PD

     The election was not a referendum on Trump's attempt to steal the election. The high turnout is not a sign that he'll fail. If he fails it will be because responsible people in the right places stopped him. That's what I think will happen. People will follow the law and that will be the end of it.

     But let's be clear that Trump had a plan prepared that might have worked if it had come down to a single state and a smaller number of votes.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 20, 2020, 02:00:01 PM
As I thought. This is an interesting article:

https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2020-55020428

Can Trump overturn the election result?

...
As doors to remaining in office slam shut, the president appears to be shifting strategies for flipping the election results from a longshot legal one to a longer-shot political gambit.

A step-by-step guide to Trump's strategy
Here's what he may hope to do:

Block the vote-certification process in as many states as possible, either through lawsuits or by encouraging Republican officials to object
Convince Republican-controlled legislatures in states Biden narrowly won to dismiss the results of the popular vote as corrupted by widespread fraud
Have the legislature then award their state's Electoral College votes, which are cast by "electors" on 14 December, to Trump instead of Biden
Do that in enough states - Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, for instance - to pull Trump from his current total of 232 electoral votes past the winning 269-vote mark
Even pulling Biden from 306 votes might work, because then the election would be decided in the House of Representatives, where even though it's controlled by the Democrats, Trump would have an advantage due to some arcane rules


...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on November 20, 2020, 02:11:59 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on November 20, 2020, 11:17:27 AM
Trump is going to have to be escorted out of the White House. There's no question about it. Whatever 'legacy' he had before election night has now been rewritten. He will go down as one of the poorest presidents in our recent history. Hell, James Buchanan and Franklin Pierce actually have better legacies than Trump and that's not saying much! ;D

I heard someone half-joke that he'd probably stage his own alternate-venue "real" inauguration for himself on inauguration day and I felt that, yes, that would be perfectly in keeping with everything else from the last five years.

-

Jill Lepore in the New Yorker:

Will Trump Burn the Evidence?
How the President could endanger the official records of one of the most consequential periods in American history. (https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/11/23/will-trump-burn-the-evidence)

^and there's also lots of fascinating info about what became of presidential records through the 19th century in that piece, and of same in the Reagan-Clinton era.


Over the last couple of years I've found historian Jill Lepore to be one of the most intelligent and articulate voices in the compare-and-contrast of the Trump presidency with the norms and practices and attitudes to foundational documents of previous generations.

But I know her mainly from lectures and podcasts and now want to start on her books, particularly her 1000-page These Truths. Has anyone here read it? Or any of her other works?

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/91NZ5Cw-4TL.jpg)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 20, 2020, 03:15:05 PM

     The Michigan legislators who met with Trump say they heard nothing that would change the results of the election. In Georgia Hideous Demon Gov. Kemp has decided to follow the law.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on November 20, 2020, 03:35:10 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on November 20, 2020, 02:11:59 PM
I heard someone half-joke that he'd probably stage his own alternate-venue "real" inauguration for himself on inauguration day and I felt that, yes, that would be perfectly in keeping with everything else from the last five years.

I wouldn't put anything past him. Just when you think he couldn't go lower, he does and brags about it: "I'm the greatest. I really am. They thought they had me, but I showed them. I mean has there ever been a president who has done I've done? No, nobody has done what I've done. They really haven't."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on November 20, 2020, 05:48:58 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on November 20, 2020, 02:11:59 PM
I heard someone half-joke that he'd probably stage his own alternate-venue "real" inauguration for himself on inauguration day and I felt that, yes, that would be perfectly in keeping with everything else from the last five years.

-

Jill Lepore in the New Yorker:

Will Trump Burn the Evidence?
How the President could endanger the official records of one of the most consequential periods in American history. (https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/11/23/will-trump-burn-the-evidence)

^and there's also lots of fascinating info about what became of presidential records through the 19th century in that piece, and of same in the Reagan-Clinton era.


Over the last couple of years I've found historian Jill Lepore to be one of the most intelligent and articulate voices in the compare-and-contrast of the Trump presidency with the norms and practices and attitudes to foundational documents of previous generations.

But I know her mainly from lectures and podcasts and now want to start on her books, particularly her 1000-page These Truths. Has anyone here read it? Or any of her other works?

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/91NZ5Cw-4TL.jpg)

It seems to have the reputation of being an updated version of Howard Zinn. But I have enough unread books on hand that I am in no rush to add a book of that size to the pile.

I did read this a few years ago, and remember it being well done.
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/412BqAdG2QL.jpg)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 20, 2020, 11:54:22 PM
I think what you're seeing this week is that parts of the senior GOP-ers are getting tired of Trump.

He has delivered the tax cuts and hundreds of judges; the usual recipe of letting a D president clean up the mess (in this case rampant Covid and economic disaster) now kicks in.

Trump's idea of letting a washed up loony like Giuliani be his public face kind of sealed it for these folks. In the eyes of old-style Republicans neither Trump nor Giuliani are really Republicans. They're New York people. Bizarre circus animals, married x times over, tabloid show people and totally incapable of acting the trademark GOP gravitas. Cruz isn't too great at it either, but at least he tries.

The Trump Giuliani show has become such a disgusting spectacle, the GOP is eager for this to be over, too.

The next thing is the influence Trump will exert over the GOP in 2020 - 2024.

It could be huge.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 21, 2020, 04:16:04 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 20, 2020, 01:45:41 PM
     The election was not a referendum on Trump's attempt to steal the election. The high turnout is not a sign that he'll fail. If he fails it will be because responsible people in the right places stopped him. That's what I think will happen. People will follow the law and that will be the end of it.

     But let's be clear that Trump had a plan prepared that might have worked if it had come down to a single state and a smaller number of votes.
You lost me there.  Of course the election wasn't a referendum on Trump's attempt to steal the election.

In any event, like you, I think that at least 98% or more of the electors will vote the way that their constituents indicated (from what I recall reading, there are often one or two who are swayed by a phone call to go over to the other party).  I just hope that the GSA will feel like she now has the needed voting results to move ahead with the ascertainment.  It's crazy that particularly in the midst of a pandemic that this is dragging on for so long.  I'm sure that she feels under a lot of pressure to be fair.  I read an interesting article on her recently.


Here:  https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/18/politics/biden-transition-trump-delay/index.html

And this is an article/interview with a former GSA:  https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/19/politics/david-barram-gsa-2020-election-cnntv/index.html

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 21, 2020, 04:58:11 AM
The crazy Trump & Giuliani Show we are "enjoying" has been paid for by Trump supporters who delusionally think this election can be overturned for Trump and donate money for the cause. Both Trump and Giuliani know this is over, but why not extract as much money as possible from the fools before leaving the White House? Coming up with new plans to throw away votes from Democrat-leaning areas keep the donations coming.

Of course this kind of dangerous freak show should never happen in a democracy, but the US is what it is. A nation without a cultural concensus about the vision for the future. Half of the country wants to save the past while the other half wants to save the future. In this tug or war the country is stuck in present time.

My 2 cents (0.02 euros because I am European, not American).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 21, 2020, 05:16:30 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 21, 2020, 04:58:11 AM
Of course this kind of dangerous freak show should never happen in a democracy, but the US is what it is. A nation without a cultural concensus about the vision for the future. Half of the country wants to save the past while the other half wants to save the future.

This is the case in many nations. Unanimity does not equal democracy.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 21, 2020, 05:31:14 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 21, 2020, 04:58:11 AM
this kind of dangerous freak show should never happen in a democracy

On the contrary, it could happen only in a democracy, especially in an extremely legalistic one such as the USA. By its very nature a monarchy --- be it constitutional or absolute --- has a much more natural and frictionless transition: The King is Dead, Long Live the King!. Not to mention the cases when mad kings where replaced by regents / regencies or sane kings were forced to abdicate --- and none of them raised the slightest objection.  ;D

And frankly I would just love to watch live Trump being forcefully evicted from the White House, a clear sign that the rule of law reigns supreme in the USA despite oh the so numerous claims to the contrary here on GMG.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 21, 2020, 05:53:44 AM
If you check here, you can see the letter that the Democrats sent to GSA Emily Murphy basically demanding her to get back to them by Monday explaining why she hadn't recognized Biden and Harris as the winners.  One thing that I found very interesting in it (pages 2-3) was that Pres. Trump had quietly changed the order of succession within the GSA department now to include the General Council as fourth in line.  He did this on Sept. 2, 2020.  Then less than a week before the election, Pres. Trump installed Trent J. Benishek as the new GSA General Council.  Then they wonder whether or not she might being subjected to undue pressure from the White House to block the ascertainment.

Quite eyeopening!  Note:  doesn't take that long to read (only 3-page letter).

Rep. Gerry Connolly posted the letter on his Twitter account:  https://twitter.com/GerryConnolly/status/1329594898601926659/photo/1

There are footnotes showing links to where it shows Pres. Trump making the changes to the succession, etc.

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 21, 2020, 05:58:36 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 21, 2020, 05:31:14 AMOn the contrary, it could happen only in a democracy, especially in an extremely legalistic one such as the USA.


Yep.  And it was great.  It seems unlikely that 2022 or 2024 will be quite so wonderfully entertaining.

It is apparently lost on many people that 2020 reinforced how healthy democracy is in the United States.  Turnout was massive.  Large numbers of contests at all levels were close.  Republicans were able to flip seats in some big cities - including New York.  Right in line with Dem desires, the candidates offered were more diverse than normal - from both parties.  Fears of Russian and Chinese (and Iranian!) interference bubbled up here and there in a few sensationalist press stories, but they kind of fizzled.  Gobs and gobs of money were spent everywhere, and fortunately Dems wasted tens of millions based on shoddy polling and organization.  (Someone should probably explain why Amy McGrath should have been funneled so much money when she was just a tomato can.)  And the end result is, yes, Congressional gridlock!  There will be no sweeping repudiations of the Constitution like Dems and "Progressives" the world over have been clamoring for - eg, packing the court - and instead the US will lurch back to a more institutionalist type of administration.  I do wonder which poor country the new administration will bomb first.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 21, 2020, 06:42:43 AM

     The poor country that is most bombed is the US. Trumpists have inflicted a huge total of excess deaths, though the exact toll won't ever be known. We can produce estimates from comparisons with countries in the developed world.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 21, 2020, 07:14:31 AM
The last election lawsuit in Arizona has been tossed out:  https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/elections-2020/judge-tosses-last-election-lawsuit-in-arizona/ar-BB1bekdg
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 21, 2020, 07:30:06 AM

     The dirty little secret pollsters need to own up to (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/11/19/why-were-polls-wrong-ignore-calls/)

Many voters who fit the "Likely Trump Supporter" profile were not willing to do an interview. It was especially hard to interview older men. Similarly, we were less likely to complete interviews with Trump households in Miami's media market. Whatever the motivation, this behavior almost certainly introduced bias into poll results, dampening apparent support for Trump.

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: flyingdutchman on November 21, 2020, 07:43:07 AM
Love John Fetterman the anger translator:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/meet-pennsylvania-anger-translator-donald-150025723.html

Pay up Dan Patrick.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 21, 2020, 08:39:47 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 21, 2020, 04:16:04 AM
You lost me there.  Of course the election wasn't a referendum on Trump's attempt to steal the election.



     I'm pointing out that the results of the election can't be used to refute Trump's efforts to overturn it. One can predict Trump will fail, and I do. The election itself, though, is no guarantee of that failure. Trump is trying to steal an election he lost, because he lost. The argument that he's not trying to steal it because he lost it is nonsensical.

     Perhaps this novel formulation is motivated by the observation that Trump tried to steal an election in 2016 that he unexpectedly won. I'm trying to be charitable. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/cheesy.gif)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 21, 2020, 08:55:47 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 21, 2020, 08:39:47 AMThe argument that he's not trying to steal it because he lost it is nonsensical.

Q.E.D.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 21, 2020, 09:14:39 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 21, 2020, 08:39:47 AM
     I'm pointing out that the results of the election can't be used to refute Trump's efforts to overturn it. One can predict Trump will fail, and I do. The election itself, though, is no guarantee of that failure. Trump is trying to steal an election he lost, because he lost. The argument that he's not trying to steal it because he lost it is nonsensical.

     Perhaps this novel formulation is motivated by the observation that Trump tried to steal an election in 2016 that he unexpectedly won. I'm trying to be charitable. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/cheesy.gif)
I don't think that anyone here was/is trying to say otherwise?  :)

Best,

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 21, 2020, 09:37:58 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 21, 2020, 09:14:39 AM
I don't think that anyone here was/is trying to say otherwise?  :)

Best,

PD

     I think the Trump strategy is misunderstood. At no point was the quality of the legal cases brought of any relevance. The numerous cases amount to a pretext for public consumption. The real battle is convincing state officials to substitute Biden electors with Trump electors. That's the battle Trump is fighting and losing. Public agitation was supposed to give these champions of healthy democracy cover. It hasn't worked. Trump lost too many states by too many votes.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 21, 2020, 09:47:00 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 21, 2020, 09:14:39 AM
I don't think that anyone here was/is trying to say otherwise?  :)

I think there are two different issues here.

1. Did he try to steal the elections proper? I don't think so, but if people here have and can present solid evidence that he did I'll reconsider.

2. Does he try to change the outcome of the elections? Obviously, but he'll achieve nothing else than making a fool of himself yet again.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 21, 2020, 10:05:07 AM
According to most reporting "strategy" and "Trump" don't go in one sentence very well.

He is just throwing stuff against the wall hoping something will stick.

Inviting those MI lawmakers after they had signed their names to the Wayne County numbers, for instance.

That doesn't make any strategic sense.

He started with a bunch of good lawyers, but when these people saw that they were expected to sell conspiracy madness to the judges, they balked and left.

So now Trump is stuck with Giuliani who can't argue his way out of a paper bag.

Trump has alienated everyone with a modicum of sense and decency. So he's left with a couple of desperados.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 21, 2020, 10:14:42 AM
Quote from: Herman on November 21, 2020, 10:05:07 AM
According to most reporting "strategy" and "Trump" don't go in one sentence very well.

He is just throwing stuff against the wall hoping something will stick.

Inviting those MI lawmakers after they had signed their names to the Wayne County numbers, for instance.

That doesn't make any strategic sense.

He started with a bunch of good lawyers, but when these people saw that they were expected to sell conspiracy madness to the judges, they balked and left.

So now Trump is stuck with Giuliani who can't argue his way out of a paper bag.

Trump has alienated everyone with a modicum of sense and decency. So he's left with a couple of desperados.

I really think (as detailed in the BBC article I posted yesterday) the remaining strategy is the elector-switch/substitute gambit.
But it's typical Cheeto Mussolinism to fling as much s**t as possible at the ceiling and hope something sticks.

If you trace CM's bio and business history, he's had a strong tendency to hire lesser-known law firms (+accountants, etc.) with dubious reputations rather than big-name white-shoe ones. A little surprising for someone of his claimed wealth. But it's surely because CM wants to be his own counsel and boss the lawyers around. And, I also suspect, because he has a well-documented record of underpaying / not paying contractors.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 21, 2020, 10:36:59 AM
Quote from: Herman on November 21, 2020, 10:05:07 AM
According to most reporting "strategy" and "Trump" don't go in one sentence very well.

He is just throwing stuff against the wall hoping something will stick.



     I think not. It looks that way because people think real lawyers abandoning ship and Giuliani taking over is strategically significant. It's not, and Giuliani is just as good as a genius lawyer for the intended purpose and perhaps better. He makes the right noises and keeps Trumpists riled up. Trump doesn't need genius lawyers to handle garbage cases. He doesn't want or need to lose these cases any differently than he's doing with Rudy. Are not the judges part of the conspiracy? But of course they are!

     It's not magic, though the legal misdirection has some of that flavor.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 21, 2020, 10:40:49 AM
Quote from: Herman on November 21, 2020, 10:05:07 AM


Trump has alienated everyone with a modicum of sense and decency. So he's left with a couple of desperados.

     Al Capone was right. You can accomplish more with a kind word and a gun than you can with a kind word alone. The Michigan Proud Boys chickened out. Blame them, not Trump.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 21, 2020, 02:09:34 PM
https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2020-55030617

Republican officials in Michigan have written to the state's electoral board to request a two-week adjournment.

They have called for an audit of the presidential vote in the largest county, home to Detroit, after it was contested by President Donald Trump.

However, the Michigan Department of State has quickly objected to the idea, saying delays and audits are not permitted by law.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 21, 2020, 02:13:12 PM
Quote from: drogulus on November 21, 2020, 09:37:58 AM
     I think the Trump strategy is misunderstood. At no point was the quality of the legal cases brought of any relevance. The numerous cases amount to a pretext for public consumption. The real battle is convincing state officials to substitute Biden electors with Trump electors. That's the battle Trump is fighting and losing. Public agitation was supposed to give these champions of healthy democracy cover. It hasn't worked. Trump lost too many states by too many votes.
Perhaps that was his strategy or maybe a combo of "We'll see what sticks and trying to rile up his most fervent of voters to to help encourage the electors too switch?"  Or maybe even some cover?  I don't know and try not to be that cynical to be honest.

I did see this at my end (from a BBC article today)--an extract:

"Republican officials in Michigan have written to the state's electoral board to request a two-week adjournment.
They have called for an audit of the presidential vote in the largest county, home to Detroit, after it was contested by President Donald Trump.
However, the Michigan Department of State has quickly objected to the idea, saying delays and audits are not permitted by law.
Democrat Joe Biden was projected as the state's winner earlier this month.
The Michigan electoral board, made up of two Democrats and two Republicans, is set to meet on Monday and certify election results.
Their decision has to be signed off by Michigan's secretary of state and then the governor, both Democrats and so is unlikely to support any changes, without substantiated reasoning.
The state department has called claims of widespread fraud, repeated by President Trump and the local Republicans, "wholly meritless".

Here's the whole article here:  https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2020-55030617

I'd like to know who the "Republican officials" were/are mentioned herein.

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 21, 2020, 02:14:41 PM
Quote from: T. D. on November 21, 2020, 02:09:34 PM
https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2020-55030617

Republican officials in Michigan have written to the state's electoral board to request a two-week adjournment.

They have called for an audit of the presidential vote in the largest county, home to Detroit, after it was contested by President Donald Trump.

However, the Michigan Department of State has quickly objected to the idea, saying delays and audits are not permitted by law.

We're posting at the same time about the same article! I was slower at my end (doing some edits, etc.) though.

Best,

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 21, 2020, 02:15:49 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on November 20, 2020, 08:53:13 AM
Maybe I should move to Japan --- it sounds like my kind of place. :)
Japan hasn't had serious lockdowns either. It's definitely impacted the economy a lot though. But social distancing is sort of a cultural feature. It can be a real negative in terms of mental and societal health, but it probably saved Japan from COVID.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 21, 2020, 02:22:42 PM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 21, 2020, 02:13:12 PM
Perhaps that was his strategy or maybe a combo of "We'll see what sticks and trying to rile up his most fervent of voters to to help encourage the electors too switch?"



     That's what I just said. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/angry.gif) (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/angry.gif) (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/angry.gif) Trump came up one Reichstag fire short is all. The Good People On Both Sides failed to appear.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 21, 2020, 10:32:29 PM
Quote from: drogulus on November 21, 2020, 02:22:42 PM
     Trump came up one Reichstag fire short is all.

I try hard to make sense of this phrase. I really do.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 21, 2020, 11:59:16 PM
QuoteTrump came up one Reichstag fire short is all. The Good People On Both Sides failed to appear.

There are two months left
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 22, 2020, 12:29:34 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 21, 2020, 10:36:59 AM
     I think not. It looks that way because people think real lawyers abandoning ship and Giuliani taking over is strategically significant. It's not, and Giuliani is just as good as a genius lawyer for the intended purpose and perhaps better. He makes the right noises and keeps Trumpists riled up. Trump doesn't need genius lawyers to handle garbage cases. He doesn't want or need to lose these cases any differently than he's doing with Rudy. Are not the judges part of the conspiracy? But of course they are!

     It's not magic, though the legal misdirection has some of that flavor.

Short of staging an actual non pseudo-legal coup in December (which would be hard since the generals are not thus inclined) what Trump is now about is is stoking resentment and anger among his base, so he'll keep calling the shots after January 20.

People who are thinking some kind of normal will return when Biden is in the (thoroughly disinfected hopefully)  White House may be in for a disappointment. There's nothing that will keep Trump from tweeting to his tens of millions of followers, keeping the flame of "rigged election" and "stop the steal" alive. In that way he'll keep Republican leadership in thrall, too.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 22, 2020, 02:14:55 AM
Quote from: Herman on November 22, 2020, 12:29:34 AM
what Trump is now about

Trump is already history. This de facto situation will be established de jure on December 12, 2020 and will be effective January 20, 2021. Anyone who after that will still be commenting on what Trump does says and twitters will prove ipso facto that TDS is real.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 22, 2020, 02:55:34 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 21, 2020, 02:22:42 PM
     That's what I just said. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/angry.gif) (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/angry.gif) (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/angry.gif) Trump came up one Reichstag fire short is all. The Good People On Both Sides failed to appear.



Location: Watertown, MA« Reply #463 on: November 21, 2020, 11:36:59 AM »
Quote
Quote from: Herman on November 21, 2020, 11:05:07 AM
According to most reporting "strategy" and "Trump" don't go in one sentence very well.

He is just throwing stuff against the wall hoping something will stick.


Your response Drogulus:
    I think not. It looks that way because people think real lawyers abandoning ship and Giuliani taking over is strategically significant. It's not, and Giuliani is just as good as a genius lawyer for the intended purpose and perhaps better. He makes the right noises and keeps Trumpists riled up. Trump doesn't need genius lawyers to handle garbage cases. He doesn't want or need to lose these cases any differently than he's doing with Rudy. Are not the judges part of the conspiracy? But of course they are!

     It's not magic, though the legal misdirection has some of that flavor.
Too much quoting for me to do properly here.  You can scroll back to see my response which you then replied to.  So I don't understand why the 'angry faces' at me?  :(

Best wishes,

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on November 22, 2020, 03:51:06 AM
Quote from: Herman on November 22, 2020, 12:29:34 AM
Short of staging an actual non pseudo-legal coup in December (which would be hard since the generals are not thus inclined) what Trump is now about is is stoking resentment and anger among his base, so he'll keep calling the shots after January 20.

People who are thinking some kind of normal will return when Biden is in the (thoroughly disinfected hopefully)  White House may be in for a disappointment. There's nothing that will keep Trump from tweeting to his tens of millions of followers, keeping the flame of "rigged election" and "stop the steal" alive. In that way he'll keep Republican leadership in thrall, too.

So convicted and jailed felons have unlimited internet access? :)

Reichstag fire? He was hoping for scary urban violence in Detroit and Philadelphia, but PA judges shut down his provocation there and in MI the certification of the vote today, if, as seems likely, that happens, will end that threat. He's still working on Arizona.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 22, 2020, 05:00:06 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on November 22, 2020, 03:51:06 AM
Reichstag fire? He was hoping for scary urban violence in Detroit and Philadelphia, but PA judges shut down his provocation there and in MI the certification of the vote today, if, as seems likely, that happens, will end that threat.

Wait a minute! Are you saying that the rule of law is up and running in the USA under Trump's presidency? My, my...

Es gibt noch Richter in Berlin Die Vereinigten Staaten! --- if you know what I mean.  ;D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 22, 2020, 05:10:10 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on November 22, 2020, 03:51:06 AM
So convicted and jailed felons have unlimited internet access? :)

my assumption is this is not going to happen...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 22, 2020, 05:41:09 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 22, 2020, 05:34:31 AM
December 14th is when the Electoral College meets, and January 6th is when Congress tallies the votes and declares the new President.  Super-Creepy 46 takes power at noon on January 20, 2021.

I got only one date correct out of three. I stand corrected but my argument stands nevertheless.

Quote
Trump may announce his candidacy for the 2024 race.  This serves several purposes.  It keeps him relevant.  It also provides potential legal cover for his alleged nefarious deeds.  It would be somewhat unseemly for the party in power to actually prosecute a high profile political opponent.  Even if Trump does not announce and run, it will prove a bit tricky politically for feds to vigorously pursue Trump.  But he will remain more significant than most prior presidents when leaving office.  This is distinct from TDS, which is a very real thing.

I really wonder: who was the very first POTUS to be widely regarded and publicly denounced as a traitor to the FF's ideals, as a would-be dictator and as one whose nefarious legacy would take decades to undo? My uneducated guess is that Trump is not that very first.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on November 22, 2020, 05:44:12 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 22, 2020, 05:41:09 AM
I got only one date correct out of three. I stand corrected but my argument stands nevertheless.

I really wonder: who was the very first POTUS to be widely regarded and publicly denounced as a traitor to the FF's ideals, as a would-be dictator and as one whose nefarious legacy would take decades to undo? My uneducated guess is that Trump is not that very first.

John Adams, followed closely by Thomas Jefferson.
Although it was a bit too early for people to use the word "legacy".
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 22, 2020, 06:00:53 AM
Quote from: JBS on November 22, 2020, 05:44:12 AM
John Adams, followed closely by Thomas Jefferson.

Good company for Donald, eh?  ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 22, 2020, 06:06:45 AM
A feel good story from the failing New York Times: Republican Resistance Looms in the Senate for Biden's Nominees (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/20/us/politics/biden-nominees-senate-republicans.html?searchResultPosition=1)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 22, 2020, 06:14:31 AM
Quote from: JBS on November 22, 2020, 05:44:12 AM
John Adams, followed closely by Thomas Jefferson.
Although it was a bit too early for people to use the word "legacy".

Am I correct in thinking that the only universally admired and unanimously uncontroversial POTUS was George Washington, and that after him everything went downhill headlong along those partisan lines he dreaded so much albeit naively? Am I correct in thinking that Trump has been no more divisive and hated today than Andrew Jackson has been in his time? Am I correct in thinking that nihil novum sub sole?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 22, 2020, 06:21:37 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 22, 2020, 06:14:31 AMAm I correct in thinking that the only universally admired and unanimously uncontroversial POTUS was George Washington, and that after him everything went downhill headlong along those partisan lines he dreaded so much albeit naively? Am I correct in thinking that Trump has been no more divisive and hated today than Andrew Jackson has been in his time? Am I correct in thinking that nihil novum sub sole?


You are incorrect.  George Washington was not universally admired and certainly was not unanimously uncontroversial, not even close. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 22, 2020, 06:28:24 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 22, 2020, 06:21:37 AM

You are incorrect.  George Washington was not universally admired and certainly was not unanimously uncontroversial, not even close.

Hah!  :D :D :D

So he was the first traitor and would-be dictator?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 22, 2020, 06:41:13 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 22, 2020, 06:28:24 AM
Hah!  :D :D :D

So he was the first traitor and would-be dictator?


Well, he may have secretly wanted to be king, you see.  And there was the Whiskey Rebellion kerfuffle.  And his general lack of ability and intelligence - if some of his famous subordinates were and are to be believed.

Here's a good quote from 1796:

Quote from: Thomas PaineThe world will be puzzled to decide whether you are an apostate or an impostor; whether you have abandoned good principles, or whether you ever had any.


But Trump and the hyperpartisanship of the here and now are unique and special and are clear and present dangers to the survival of the republic itself.  Don't you ever forget it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 22, 2020, 06:46:10 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 22, 2020, 06:41:13 AM

Well, he may have secretly wanted to be king, you see.  And there was the Whiskey Rebellion kerfuffle.  And his general lack of ability and intelligence - if some of his famous subordinates were and are to be believed.

Here's a good quote from 1796:

Nihil novum sub sole...

QuoteBut Trump and the hyperpartisanship of the here and now are unique and special and are clear and present dangers to the survival of the republic itself.  Don't you ever forget it.

...except Trump.







Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 22, 2020, 06:53:05 AM
     From an interview on NPR;

FADEL: So remind our listeners why you say this is an example of fascist behavior.

STANLEY: So fascism is a cult of the leader who promises national restoration in the face of supposed humiliation by minorities, liberals and immigrants. He represents the cities as corrupt, filled with foreigners and disease, and the heartland as the true nation that he represents. And then he takes over a political party, transforms them into a cult of the leader and says only he can deal with the problem.


     As a general description this should suffice. It's not custom designed to fit Trump, it's how fascist behavior has been understood since long before Trump appeared. There are reasons to object that Trump doesn't make the cut. One is the lack of a manifesto, another is that the government is not fascist notwithstanding Trump's efforts. I leave it up to my fellow pseudos to decide.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 22, 2020, 07:17:50 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 22, 2020, 06:53:05 AM
     From an interview on NPR;

FADEL: So remind our listeners why you say this is an example of fascist behavior.

STANLEY: So fascism is a cult of the leader who promises national restoration in the face of supposed humiliation by minorities, liberals and immigrants.

Bah humbug! There were no minorities and immigrants in Italy when Mussolini took power.

QuoteHe represents the cities as corrupt, filled with foreigners and disease, and the heartland as the true nation that he represents.

Bah humbug! Mussolini appealed --- quite succesfully --- to both city and countryside, and if anything he promoted modernist architecture of the kind one still sees in Rome and other big cities, not in any countryside. And the Fascist intellectuals were all urbanites.

QuoteAnd then he takes over a political party, transforms them into a cult of the leader and says only he can deal with the problem.

Bah humbug! Mussolini started as a Socialist but he never took over that party, he created his own.

   
QuoteAs a general description this should suffice.

Only for people completely ignorant of history.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 22, 2020, 07:34:42 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 22, 2020, 06:53:05 AM
   There are reasons to object that Trump doesn't make the cut. One is the lack of a manifesto, another is that the government is not fascist notwithstanding Trump's efforts.

Anyone with a modicum of historical awareness and knowledge could rightly argue that Caesar, Louis XIV or Napoleon Bonaparte exhibited traits that can be regarded as Fascist. Nobody with a modicum of historical awareness and knowledge could seriously claim that they were Fascist.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 22, 2020, 07:42:45 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 22, 2020, 07:37:39 AM
Agreed. He'd better spend it educating himself on what Fascism really is.


It is not uncommon for people to fixate on what are ultimately distractions.  For some, it's Fascism.  For some, it's Communism.  For some it's Antifa.  For some, it's Proud Boys, et al.  For some, it's Russia.  For some, it's radical Islamic terrorism.  For some, it's immigration.  And yet the republic lumbers on, occasionally making "progress", sometimes regressing, and often pummeling small, weak countries.  Even Orange Man could not change that.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 22, 2020, 08:08:56 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 22, 2020, 07:42:45 AM

It is not uncommon for people to fixate on what are ultimately distractions.  For some, it's Fascism.  For some, it's Communism. 

Much to the shock and horror of Herman, I'll say that if given a retrospective choice between living in Mussolini's Italy or in Ceaușescu's Romania I'd choose the former without hesitation; and better still I'd choose Trump's USA over both.

For the record, in Riomanian context I have always called myself a liberal and I've always voted for a party called National Liberal Party or for a coalition wherein this party took part (except when they were allied with the Social-Democrats, when I voted a party called Liberal Democratic Party --- so I was still a liberal voter). I've been called a leftist by conservatives and a reactionary by progressives. I guess I'm a centrist. Actually, I know I am a centrist.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 22, 2020, 08:23:26 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 22, 2020, 07:42:45 AM
often pummeling small, weak countries. 

I wonder which will be the next such country?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 22, 2020, 08:30:24 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 22, 2020, 08:23:26 AM
I wonder which will be the next such country?


There are so many to choose from!  And no country or combination of countries can stop the USA from engaging in unilateral military action against small, weak countries.  Were I to bet, I'd say some hapless African country, though the Greater Middle East needs a good bombing on a regular basis.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 22, 2020, 08:38:43 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 22, 2020, 08:30:24 AM
Were I to bet, I'd say some hapless African country,

Such as Lybia, which is nowadays all but destroyed following Trump's orders and actions?

No, wait, it's been actually Bush II's.

No, wait, it's been actually.... oh, my! Oh, my! Am I a Trumpist for saying Obama's?


Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Sterna on November 22, 2020, 08:50:38 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 22, 2020, 08:38:43 AM
Such as Lybia, which is nowadays all but destroyed following Trump's orders and actions?

No, wait, it's been actually Bush II's.

No, wait, it's been actually.... oh, my! Oh, my! Am I a Trumpist for saying Obama's?

Why bother?

Trump is history.
Bush II is history.
Obama is history.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Zeus on November 22, 2020, 08:54:10 AM
Here's a simple theory explaining why GOP candidates did relatively well, even while Trump was handed a solid defeat.

If you give people three choices, there's a natural tendency to take the middle choice.  For example, if a store offers three headphones of increasing quality, one for $199, one for $399, and one for $599, then more than a third will take the middle choice.  Simplistic I know, but bear with me.

If in the political landscape, you have three choices
1) Democrats
2) Republicans
3) Batshit Crazy Trumpites
then, facing these choices, ordinary Republicans might seem like a safe middle-ground choice.

In fact, electors made several choices at once.  But many apparently split their ticket – against Trump, but for more reasonable Republicans down-ticket.  Simple choice theory offers an explanation why.

Don't know if I believe this or not, but it's an interesting thought.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 22, 2020, 08:57:37 AM
Quote from: Sterna on November 22, 2020, 08:50:38 AM
Why bother?

Trump is history.
Bush II is history.
Obama is history.

Correct, but Trump directly impacted the USA history only; Bush II and Obama (and Clinton foir that matter) directly impacted the history of other countries as well.





Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 22, 2020, 09:14:10 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 22, 2020, 08:38:43 AM
Such as Lybia, which is nowadays all but destroyed following Trump's orders and actions?


See, Libya can be counted as both part of Africa and the Greater Middle East.  That doubles its chances.  Sucks to be Libya.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 22, 2020, 09:15:16 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 22, 2020, 09:14:10 AM

See, Libya can be counted as both part of Africa and the Greater Middle East.  That doubles its chances.  Sucks to be Libya.

What puzzles me, though, is why the Socialist Obama attacked the Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya?

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 22, 2020, 02:38:41 PM
Florestan, as another example of there being nothing new under the sun, here are two instructive quotes, from over two centuries apart:

Quote from: Burleigh, in the Connecticut Courant, 1800Mr. Jefferson wishes to destroy the constitution of the United States.

Quote from: Jill Lepore, in The New Yorker, November 23, 2020The Trump Presidency nearly destroyed the United States.

Perhaps one of these quotes is true.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 22, 2020, 02:41:19 PM
Quote from: Florestan on November 22, 2020, 07:34:42 AM
Anyone with a modicum of historical awareness and knowledge could rightly argue that Caesar, Louis XIV or Napoleon Bonaparte exhibited traits that can be regarded as Fascist. Nobody with a modicum of historical awareness and knowledge could seriously claim that they were Fascist.



     Quite so, and no one does. Fascism is a reaction to the political trends of modernity, particularly liberalism and the threat it poses to tradition. Caesar comes closest as a precursor though there was nothing liberal about the oligarchy he challenged. He was a tribune though, and one sees why fascists admired him.

     The fascist category is one of family resemblance and not one of rigid designation. Mussolini didn't adopt an overtly antisemitic program until the '30s, Hitler's was from the outset. Once you get past their commonalities like autocracy, hatred of liberalism, nationalism and appeal to violence against internal enemies one finds differences in aesthetics, for example.

     Where the scholarly discussion irks me somewhat is I get the impression that Trump's ambitions are treated as though his inability to realize them proves they don't count. Nor is there much said about how Trump should be distinguished from what he's fighting against, as though nothing more should be said than what it isn't.

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on November 22, 2020, 02:46:38 PM
Quote from: Florestan on November 22, 2020, 02:14:55 AM
Trump is already history. This de facto situation will be established de jure on December 12, 2020 and will be effective January 20, 2021. Anyone who after that will still be commenting on what Trump does says and twitters will prove ipso facto that TDS is real.

I seem to recall some months back when people were saying Trump is the kind of person who would refuse to concede the election you felt this was preposterous, described it as TDS, and demanded that if and when Trump did loose and bowed out graciously that everyone here had to admit they suffered from TDS.

If people are still commenting on Trump after Jan 20 it will be because he will still be trying to sow dissent and division and subvert democratic institutions. And because the last five years need studying.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 22, 2020, 03:12:23 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on November 22, 2020, 02:46:38 PM
And because the last five years need studying.

     He not a fascist so there's nothing to study. It's one of those "nothing ever" changes.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 22, 2020, 03:27:29 PM

     To be clear, I'm amenable to using a different word for the Trumpist phenomenon. If Trumpism is sufficiently different from historical examples then we should try to understand it according to the differences instead of dismissing it as derangement of some kind. If the support of American fascists isn't enough to make Trump one of their own, we still have to figure out why they support him. I think we've done that. If Trump isn't a "real" fascist, he'll do until a real one comes along.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 22, 2020, 04:21:45 PM

If folks want to try to minimize the historical importance and moral disgrace of a US President who is a wannabe autocrat by casuistic squabbling over the word "fascist," yes they're dilly-dallying over a distraction.  Very Trumpian, incidentally
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: flyingdutchman on November 22, 2020, 07:01:22 PM
I think it illuminating to see how abnormal Trump has been in the history of the US. We can point to various past presidents who have exhibited traits that can be described as autocratic. Whether fascism is the word or philosophy to use may be considered by some to be a stretch, I see a man who has used the Justice Dept. for his own bidding. He's eliminated dissent wherever it has popped its head up, and he sought dirt on his main opponent (Biden) from a foreign state in 2019 and clearly begged Russia for the same in 2016. He's been the worst president in this country's history and has made moves to trash our alliances and destroy our standing in the world.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 22, 2020, 07:36:59 PM
Quote from: flyingdutchman on November 22, 2020, 07:01:22 PM
I think it illuminating to see how abnormal Trump has been in the history of the US. We can point to various past presidents who have exhibited traits that can be described as autocratic. Whether fascism is the word or philosophy to use may be considered by some to be a stretch, I see a man who has used the Justice Dept. for his own bidding. He's eliminated dissent wherever it has popped its head up, and he sought dirt on his main opponent (Biden) from a foreign state in 2019 and clearly begged Russia for the same in 2016. He's been the worst president in this country's history and has made moves to trash our alliances and destroy our standing in the world.

Back in 2015, even before the emergence of Cheeto Mussolini, I was bothered by certain political developments (e.g. the claimed rights of fundamentalist Christians to refuse service to gays) which reminded me of "First they came...", and made a point of reading Hannah Arendt's The origins of totalitarianism. Not a perfect book but informative. There is certainly similarity between Arendt's "totalitarianism" and the CM/alternative media/alt-right/conspiracy theory axis.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on November 22, 2020, 07:43:49 PM
Quote from: T. D. on November 22, 2020, 07:36:59 PM
Back in 2015, even before the emergence of Cheeto Mussolini, I was bothered by certain political developments (e.g. the claimed rights of fundamentalist Christians to refuse service to gays) which reminded me of "First they came...", and made a point of reading Hannah Arendt's The origins of totalitarianism. Not a perfect book but informative. There is certainly similarity between Arendt's "totalitarianism" and the CM/alternative media/alt-right/conspiracy theory axis.

My favorite sign from the protests over the Muslim Travel Ban seven days after his inauguration, and one of my favorites across the whole Trump era was: "First They Came For The Muslims And We Said...Not This Time, Motherfucker."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 22, 2020, 11:42:19 PM
Quote from: Florestan on November 22, 2020, 09:15:16 AM
What puzzles me, though, is why the Socialist Obama attacked the Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya?

I believe after this message this topic was shut down for a while, again.

Why do you, as a non-American engage in deliberatie disinformation and propaganda, calling people "traitor" and doing the "Socialist Obama" spiel?

Obama is not a socialist, he is a moderate Democrat who could easily have been a Republican twenty years ago.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 22, 2020, 11:49:22 PM
Quote from: Herman on November 22, 2020, 11:42:19 PM
Obama is not a socialist, he is a moderate Democrat who could easily have been a Republican twenty years ago.

I know all this alright. My post about the "Socialist" Obama attacking the Socialist Lybian Jamahiria was tongue in cheek but I forgot to put the scare quotes and an emoticon at the end. Apparently this caused a storm in a glass of water.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 23, 2020, 07:43:33 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 22, 2020, 09:15:16 AM
What puzzles me, though, is why the Socialist Obama attacked the Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya?

Obama is not a socialist. He is a centrist corporate. He read Karl Marx to impress and get laid with a lefty chick in the university. Later he campaigned as a left-leaning Dem to become the president, but governed as a corporate implementing Republican healthcare plan and starting endless wars. He is not at all interested of lefty ideology beyond cynical exploitation of it. Obama is the enemy of the left. He stopped Bernie last spring. Horrible selfish man and I have been a complete fool not to see it until a few years back when I got into the US politics better.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 23, 2020, 07:43:52 AM
For your information, as many of you probably already know, Michigan is one of the states planning/hoping to certify it's votes today.  I did a bit of googling and found out that the Michigan Board of State Canvassers' meeting [a virtual one] is at 1 p.m. today (I found this out via the Detroit Freepress online).  One can watch it live online.  Also, they are taking questions from the public:

"The public can comment on the meeting in writing or speak at the meeting. Requests must be submitted by signing up on the department's website here.

Members of the public who wish to speak at the meeting will be invited based on the order in which the request is received. They will have up to 3 minutes to address the board and can expect to receive information about how to log on to the webinar by the email they provide in the sign-up form."

https://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/11/23/will-michigan-certify-election-results/6388530002/ [They will embed the video on their website when it goes live; they also have a link to the youtube site which will be broadcasting it live in this article.].

Apparently, one of the board member, a Republican, has stated that he will vote against the certification.  That means then that the other Republican and the two Democrats will have to vote for it to pass.  He (sorry, I forget his name at the moment) apparently wants there to be an audit first, but legally, they have to first certify the votes and only then could there be an audit, etc.

PD

p.s.  Has anyone here heard more about what is going on with the GSA's Emily Murphy?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 23, 2020, 08:11:57 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/23/trump-appeals-pennsylvania-vote-case-seeking-to-block-biden-.html

The Trump campaign's appeal of its devastating loss in federal court in Pennsylvania misspells the word "president" and butchers grammar.

The appeal filed Monday also does not ask an appeals court to reverse its defeat or temporarily block Pennsylvania counties' certification of votes, which are due Monday.

Instead, the appeal at the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit effectively asks for a do-over of its so-far-botched legal effort to invalidate enough votes in Pennsylvania to overturn a projected victory for President-elect Joe Biden.

The campaign wants the appeals court to allow it to pursue a second amended lawsuit, which the lower court judge effectively barred them from doing with his ruling Saturday.

The appeal appears to be as much of a long shot as the case that it is based on. But it could speed up what the Trump campaign says is its plan to get the case heard by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on November 23, 2020, 08:24:19 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on November 22, 2020, 02:46:38 PM
I seem to recall some months back when people were saying Trump is the kind of person who would refuse to concede the election you felt this was preposterous, described it as TDS, and demanded that if and when Trump did loose and bowed out graciously that everyone here had to admit they suffered from TDS.

If people are still commenting on Trump after Jan 20 it will be because he will still be trying to sow dissent and division and subvert democratic institutions. And because the last five years need studying.

Donald Trump is a pathological narcissist, (see ... Narcissistic Personality Disorder (https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/narcissistic-personality-disorder/symptoms-causes/syc-20366662)).  To him it is impossible to admit defeat and rejection;  instead he is psychologically compelled blame his defeat on opponents' cheating and fraud.

In the dark corners of his psyche Trump foresaw his defeat and began to construct his excuse around that he had heard that Democrats would disproportionately vote by mail-in ballot.  But note that this myth exploded once the mailed ballot aspect played out:  now there is all sorts of claims around huge quantities of false ballots, stolen ballots, dirty vote counters, etc., etc..

What is so sad for our American friends is that millions have bought Trump's big lie at face value despite its obvious origin and purpose.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 23, 2020, 08:37:26 AM
Quote from: T. D. on November 23, 2020, 08:11:57 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/23/trump-appeals-pennsylvania-vote-case-seeking-to-block-biden-.html

The Trump campaign's appeal of its devastating loss in federal court in Pennsylvania misspells the word "president" and butchers grammar.

The appeal filed Monday also does not ask an appeals court to reverse its defeat or temporarily block Pennsylvania counties' certification of votes, which are due Monday.

Instead, the appeal at the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit effectively asks for a do-over of its so-far-botched legal effort to invalidate enough votes in Pennsylvania to overturn a projected victory for President-elect Joe Biden.

The campaign wants the appeals court to allow it to pursue a second amended lawsuit, which the lower court judge effectively barred them from doing with his ruling Saturday.

The appeal appears to be as much of a long shot as the case that it is based on. But it could speed up what the Trump campaign says is its plan to get the case heard by the U.S. Supreme Court.
This part would be laughable if it weren't such a serious matter:

"In another pending long-shot case, Pennsylvania Republicans, including Rep. Mike Kelly filed a complaint in Commonwealth Court seeking to stop certain kinds of mail-in ballots from being included in the state's final tally.

The plaintiffs seek to block the certification of the election in the state, claiming that mail-in ballots cast under an allegedly "unconstitutional" law signed last year by Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf, a Democrat, cannot be counted.

The law, Act 77, expanded access for Pennsylvania voters to cast mail-in ballots without an excuse.

After the lawsuit was filed, observers quickly pointed out that Act 77 passed a GOP-controlled Pennsylvania state legislature in 2019 with overwhelming support."

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 23, 2020, 08:39:19 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on November 23, 2020, 08:24:19 AM
Donald Trump is a pathological narcissist, (see ... Narcissistic Personality Disorder (https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/narcissistic-personality-disorder/symptoms-causes/syc-20366662)).  To him it is impossible to admit defeat and rejection;  instead he is psychologically compelled blame his defeat on opponents' cheating and fraud.

In the dark corners of his psyche Trump foresaw his defeat and began to construct his excuse around that he had heard that Democrats would disproportionately vote by mail-in ballot.  But note that this myth exploded once the mailed ballot aspect played out:  now there is all sorts of claims around huge quantities of false ballots, stolen ballots, dirty vote counters, etc., etc..

What is so sad for our American friends is that millions have bought Trump's big lie at face value despite its obvious origin and purpose.
And Pres. Trump has even voted by mail himself too (though not during this election)!  ::)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 23, 2020, 08:42:05 AM
     

Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 23, 2020, 07:43:52 AM


p.s.  Has anyone here heard more about what is going on with the GSA's Emily Murphy?


     Emily Murphy is supposed to brief House committees today on her refusal to start the official transition. That's all I know.

     She is supposed to ascertain the apparent winner. The Universe with a Murphy shaped hole in it knows Biden is the winner, and that's all there is to ascertainment.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 23, 2020, 09:09:13 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 23, 2020, 08:42:05 AM
     

     Emily Murphy is supposed to brief House committees today on her refusal to start the official transition. That's all I know.

     She is supposed to ascertain the apparent winner. The Universe with a Murphy shaped hole in it knows Biden is the winner, and that's all there is to ascertainment.
Yes, that's the last that I had heard too.

I really hope that the Michigan vote isn't split.  Oh, the remote live-stream has started here.  https://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/11/23/will-michigan-certify-election-results/6388530002/


PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on November 23, 2020, 09:16:22 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 22, 2020, 03:27:29 PM
     To be clear, I'm amenable to using a different word for the Trumpist phenomenon. If Trumpism is sufficiently different from historical examples then we should try to understand it according to the differences instead of dismissing it as derangement of some kind. If the support of American fascists isn't enough to make Trump one of their own, we still have to figure out why they support him. I think we've done that. If Trump isn't a "real" fascist, he'll do until a real one comes along.

I believe that Trump's latest and most dangerous attack on American democracy is his "big lie" that the recent election was stolen from him by fraud and cheating.  There wasn't and isn't any objectively credible evidence of this, however it is important to realized that millions of Americans believe it, (including Trump himself).

I believe this myth of the stolen election will be used by Trump to grab the '24 Republican nomination and work the myth for election to a 2nd term -- if that happens who knows what further attacks on democracy will ensue?  It won't be pretty, though.  If Trump's health declines it's no cause to celebrate because some Trump protege will step up to take his place.

Fareed Zakaria of CNN drew a parallel to the "stabbed in the back" myth of post-WWI Germany which was instrumental in the rise of German right-wing populism and eventually the Naze regime.  This myth held that socialist, Communists, and Jew undermined the (military-controlled) German government on the brink of victory, causing the defeat of Germany and the end of the monarchy.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 23, 2020, 09:33:13 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on November 23, 2020, 09:16:22 AM
I believe that Trump's latest and most dangerous attack on American democracy is his "big lie" that the recent election was stolen from him by fraud and cheating.  There wasn't and isn't any objectively credible evidence of this, however it is important to realized that millions of Americans believe it, (including Trump himself).

I believe this myth of the stolen election will be used by Trump to grab the '24 Republican nomination and work the myth for election to a 2nd term -- if that happens who knows what further attacks on democracy will ensue?  It won't be pretty, though.  If Trump's health declines it's no cause to celebrate because some Trump protege will step up to take his place.

Fareed Zakaria of CNN drew a parallel to the "stabbed in the back" myth of post-WWI Germany which was instrumental in the rise of German right-wing populism and eventually the Nazi regime.  This myth held that socialist, Communists, and Jew undermined the (military-controlled) German government on the brink of victory, causing the defeat of Germany and the end of the monarchy.

[Emphasis added] A very good point. And it won't even have to be a Cheeto Mussolini protege (sorry, I simply can't speak or type "T***p"). IMO all this s**t simply reflects the new GOP game plan.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: steve ridgway on November 23, 2020, 09:44:41 AM
I guess Trump follows the currently popular philosophy of "never give up on your dream, keep fighting and you will get what you want in the end" ::).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 23, 2020, 09:44:48 AM


     
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 23, 2020, 09:09:13 AM
Yes, that's the last that I had heard too.

I really hope that the Michigan vote isn't split.  Oh, the remote live-stream has started here.  https://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/11/23/will-michigan-certify-election-results/6388530002/


PD


     You can watch on C-SPAN.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 23, 2020, 09:47:32 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on November 23, 2020, 09:16:22 AMFareed Zakaria of CNN drew a parallel to the "stabbed in the back" myth of post-WWI Germany which was instrumental in the rise of German right-wing populism and eventually the Naze regime.  This myth held that socialist, Communists, and Jew undermined the (military-controlled) German government on the brink of victory, causing the defeat of Germany and the end of the monarchy.


Does he have a book he's peddling?  (Yes, as it turns out.)

And, yes, maybe the US follows the example of Germany, the only example that exists.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 23, 2020, 09:49:33 AM
Quote from: steve ridgway on November 23, 2020, 09:44:41 AM
I guess Trump follows the currently popular philosophy of "never give up on your dream, keep fighting and you will get what you want in the end" ::).

:D :D :D

A sentiment most vividly expressed by the greatest purveyor of this pseudo-philosophcal crap, Paulo Coelho: 'And, when you want something, all the universe conspires in helping you to achieve it.' Maybe Trump is a fan?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 23, 2020, 10:00:07 AM
     
Quote from: Todd on November 23, 2020, 09:47:32 AM

Does he have a book he's peddling?  (Yes, as it turns out.)

And, yes, maybe the US follows the example of Germany, the only example that exists.

     The American example could be used. After all, Hitler was influenced by our own CSA. He certainly appreciated the Lost Cause and US race laws.

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 23, 2020, 10:02:49 AM
I think that this poll from Seven Letter Insight was quite interesting.  Republicans and Democrats were ask various questions as to who and what they would support including issues like for or against a peaceful transition to a Biden presidency, etc.:  https://thehill.com/homenews/527138-two-thirds-of-gop-voters-support-trump-running-for-president-in-2024-survey

Currently, I'm listening to the live Michigan Board of State Canvassers meeting...quite interesting to hear from Christopher Thomas who "is a fellow with BPC's Democracy Project. Thomas is retired from the Michigan Department of State on June 30, 2017 after 40 years of election administration service, which included 36 years as Michigan's Director of Elections. Thomas worked for Democratic and Republican Secretaries of State.
While employed by the Michigan Secretary of State, Thomas administered the Michigan election law, campaign finance act and lobbyist disclosure law and served as Secretary to Board of State Canvassers. He began his election administration career in 1974 in Washington, D.C. with the Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives and the Federal Election Commission."

And now Daniel Baxter:  https://www.eac.gov/sites/default/files/event_document/files/BIOv.2.Daniel%20A.%20Baxter.pdf

Norman Shinkle (on the board) grilled Christopher Thomas about what reasons one could adjourn and delay the vote (per Michigan statute).  Mr. Thomas, towards the end, that he didn't know.... maybe if one or two people were sick, but that basically, the board must vote and didn't have any reason to wait forty days.

I don't know how many of your general populace will be allowed to speak (as of the beginning of the meeting, over 700 had signed up to either speak or have their comments read).

PD

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 23, 2020, 10:06:29 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 23, 2020, 09:44:48 AM

     
     You can watch on C-SPAN.
Thanks.  It's streaming fine at the other website, but nice to know that there are options!  :)

Are you watching it Drogulus?

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 23, 2020, 10:08:42 AM
Quote from: steve ridgway on November 23, 2020, 09:44:41 AM
I guess Trump follows the currently popular philosophy of "never give up on your dream, keep fighting and you will get what you want in the end" ::).

     (https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/41SthiR-R6L._SX322_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)

     Trump says he was inspired by this book. In particular it told him to never admit defeat.

Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 23, 2020, 10:06:29 AM
Thanks.  It's streaming fine at the other website, but nice to know that there are options!  :)

Are you watching it Drogulus?

PD

     It's on another tab while I defeat fascism in this one. So, I'm listening along.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 23, 2020, 10:16:11 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 23, 2020, 10:08:42 AM
     It's on another tab while I defeat fascism in this one. So, I'm listening along.

Goldarnit! Are you doing enough against Communism, though?!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 23, 2020, 10:31:37 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 23, 2020, 10:16:11 AM
Goldarnit! Are you doing enough against Communism, though?!

     No matter what I do, it's never enough.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 23, 2020, 10:42:48 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 23, 2020, 10:31:37 AM
     No matter what I do, it's never enough.

I feel ya.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 23, 2020, 10:48:44 AM
Some levity:

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/23/trump-fears-giuliani-and-other-biden-vote-challenge-lawyers-are-fools.html
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 23, 2020, 10:56:37 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 23, 2020, 10:08:42 AM
     (https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/41SthiR-R6L._SX322_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)

     Trump says he was inspired by this book. In particular it told him to never admit defeat.

     It's on another tab while I defeat fascism in this one. So, I'm listening along.
You're a busy man!

I can see that Mr. Shinkle is not to be swayed.  :(

Interesting to hear the comments and debate.

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 23, 2020, 11:01:02 AM
Quote from: T. D. on November 23, 2020, 10:48:44 AM
Some levity:

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/23/trump-fears-giuliani-and-other-biden-vote-challenge-lawyers-are-fools.html
He should just disassociate from everyone, non?  :-\

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 23, 2020, 11:12:54 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 23, 2020, 10:56:37 AM
You're a busy man!

I can see that Mr. Shinkle is not to be swayed.  :(

Interesting to hear the comments and debate.

PD

     He's taking the position that a post certification audit or recount can happen before he certifies the result. For this he wants to adjourn. That's exactly how much sense it makes. He wants what he can't have.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 23, 2020, 11:30:12 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 23, 2020, 11:12:54 AM
     He's taking the position that a post certification audit or recount can happen before he certifies the result. For this he wants to adjourn. That's exactly how much sense it makes. He wants what he can't have.
I know.  He and a lawyer (sorry, I don't recall his name) are trying to argue that this is applicable:  Section 168.842.  The lawyer, in particular, got into it with Aaron Van Langevelde — Republican, vice chair in which he was arguing that the state canvassers did have more authority (basically, that it didn't need to be defined specifically) vs. what Mr. Van Langevelde was arguing.

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 23, 2020, 11:43:48 AM
Wow, the mayor of Jackson MI, Derek Dobies, has a contribution to the hearing at the board of canvassers, talking about the harrassment by Republican "observers" during the vote counting .
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 23, 2020, 11:55:03 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 23, 2020, 11:30:12 AM
I know.  He and a lawyer (sorry, I don't recall his name) are trying to argue that this is applicable:  Section 168.842. 
PD

The board has power to adjourn from time to time to await the receipt or correction of returns, or for other necessary purposes, but shall complete the canvass and announce their determination not later than the fortieth day after the election.

     There's no other necessary purpose for the board to adjourn. They have a quorum. Any audit or recount would come after certification.

     Brater just made the point. We can put this one to rest.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 23, 2020, 11:58:45 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/23/trump-loses-pennsylvania-ballot-lawsuit-seeking-to-block-biden-win.html
Trump campaign suffers new court loss in attempt to block Biden's win in Pennsylvania
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 23, 2020, 12:23:41 PM
A non-party affiliated observer, named Elizabeth Temkin (from the U of M), talks about the relentless harrassment she observed coming from Republican affiliated observers during the vote counting at a city precinct (i.e. many black voters). She spent seven hours there as an observer and noted that some of the Republican observers challenged every single ballot just to make life miserable for the counters and to slow down the process as much as possible.

Another UofM student, Sean Brennan (speaking from the beautiful Law School building), talks about similar behavior at the vote counting location in Ann Arbor; Republican observers harrassing vote counters unmasked, getting too close and challenging every singe ballot indiscriminatedly, which is against the law. When this Law Student told him this, the Republican observer said he wasn't there to observe the law but to do what the republican party told him to do. Sabotage the count.

This is also worthwhile since the Diner Cop thought it was his task to mention that A Trump had not attempted to steal the elections and B there had been no voter harrassment, so all those predictions were false.

Alternative facts...

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 23, 2020, 12:47:58 PM
The Sweaty Clown Car's Wolverine State boondoggle is over:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/michigan-vote-certification/2020/11/23/c435ed24-2d52-11eb-bae0-50bb17126614_story.html
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 23, 2020, 12:49:40 PM
Quote from: Herman on November 23, 2020, 12:23:41 PMThis is also worthwhile since the Diner Cop thought it was his task to mention that A Trump had not attempted to steal the elections and B there had been no voter harrassment, so all those predictions were false.


Contrary to what has been written on GMG, Trump did not attempt to steal the election.

Question to moderators, does Herman get a pass on using nicknames for board members, as opposed to politicians?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 23, 2020, 12:52:34 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 23, 2020, 12:47:58 PM
The Sweaty Clown Car's Wolverine State boondoggle is over:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/michigan-vote-certification/2020/11/23/c435ed24-2d52-11eb-bae0-50bb17126614_story.html (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/michigan-vote-certification/2020/11/23/c435ed24-2d52-11eb-bae0-50bb17126614_story.html)

Incidentally: Detroit had more vote errors in 2016 when Trump won Michigan by a narrow margin. He didn't object then.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on November 23, 2020, 01:37:37 PM
Quote from: Todd on November 23, 2020, 12:49:40 PM

Contrary to what has been written on GMG, Trump did not attempt to steal the election.


Of course he didn't! How could anyone think threatening state legislators in order to coerce their disenfranchisement of millions of voters in Michigan was an effort to steal an election? That's just absurd.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 23, 2020, 01:49:31 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on November 23, 2020, 01:37:37 PM
Of course he didn't! How could anyone think threatening state legislators in order to coerce their disenfranchisement of millions of voters in Michigan was an effort to steal an election? That's just absurd.


I should like to see evidence that supports this.  Preferably, it would meet a standard rather higher than the evidence offered for his impeachment trial.

Last I saw, in the failing New York Times, Michigan certified the vote for Biden, so all the sound and fury was and is for nothing.

Maybe Trump's nefarious deeds in the Wolverine State can be added to the voluminous list of charges that can be brought in 2021, or whenever.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on November 23, 2020, 02:04:51 PM
Strange how prevalent this illogical argument is: that if Trump didn't succeed in doing something that proves he wasn't trying in the first place. That the efforts of those who battled Trump and stopped it from happening needn't have bothered in the first place because they ultimately succeeded thereby proving it was never necessary.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 23, 2020, 02:35:27 PM

     
Quote from: Todd on November 23, 2020, 01:49:31 PM


Last I saw, in the failing New York Times, Michigan certified the vote for Biden, so all the sound and fury was and is for nothing.


     If Trump stops fighting, the noise will die down.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 23, 2020, 02:36:55 PM
https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-health-national-security-rob-portman-coronavirus-pandemic-ac923137dfb664e5c3a1923f52eebbad

WASHINGTON (AP) — The General Services Administration has ascertained that President-elect Joe Biden is the "apparent winner" of the Nov. 3 election. President Donald Trump, who had refused to concede the election, said Monday that he is directing his team to cooperate on the transition but is vowing to keep up the fight.

The move clears the way for the start of the transition from Trump's administration and allows Biden to coordinate with federal agencies on plans for taking over on Jan. 20.

An official said Administrator Emily Murphy made the determination after Trump efforts to subvert the vote failed across battleground states, most recently in Michigan, which certified Biden's victory Monday.

"Please know that I came to my decision independently, based on the law and available facts. I was never directly or indirectly pressured by any Executive Branch official—including those who work at the White House or GSA—with regard to the substance or timing of my decision," Murphy wrote in a letter to Biden.

Trump tweeted shortly after her letter was made public: "Our case STRONGLY continues, we will keep up the good... fight, and I believe we will prevail! Nevertheless, in the best interest of our Country, I am recommending that Emily and her team do what needs to be done with regard to initial protocols, and have told my team to do the same."

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 23, 2020, 02:44:42 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on November 23, 2020, 02:04:51 PM
Strange how prevalent this illogical argument is: that if Trump didn't succeed in doing something that proves he wasn't trying in the first place. That the efforts of those who battled Trump and stopped it from happening needn't have bothered in the first place because they ultimately succeeded thereby proving it was never necessary.

It's of a piece with the "since the mugshots of those conspiring to kidnap the Governor of Michigan appear to be a bunch of knuckle-draggers, conspiring to kidnap the Governor of Michigan cannot be a crime worth our notice."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 23, 2020, 02:56:50 PM
     

     At last, our time has come!

     (https://cosmonaut.blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/cpa-unifiedcpaloco.gif)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 23, 2020, 04:24:22 PM
Quote from: Todd on November 23, 2020, 01:49:31 PM

I should like to see evidence that supports this.  Preferably, it would meet a standard rather higher than the evidence offered for his impeachment trial.

Last I saw, in the failing New York Times, Michigan certified the vote for Biden, so all the sound and fury was and is for nothing.

Maybe Trump's nefarious deeds in the Wolverine State can be added to the voluminous list of charges that can be brought in 2021, or whenever.
It's fine to be a stickler on these things. And then you stop short. But it'd be gaslighting to say Trum isn't doing damage. Millions of people live in a dangerous alternate reality where dark forces have outright stolen the election. Trum as nurtured this since the summer and uses it to further weaken the possibility of consensus on basic facts in America. Some republicans have gone along with this. He hasn't stolen the election, though he wants to. I'm not sure what you think. Sometimes you've seemed to intimate that this kind of chaos is good because it weakens the federal government. Maybe I've misunderstood you. It's a little frightening to me to have family members who are basically hysterical in their conspiracy world - one that trump has encouraged from the beginning. There are definitely negative consequences here. Ultimately, I find it much more interesting to argue about ideas but a swath of Americans are arguing about conspiracies. This is not good.   
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 23, 2020, 05:20:55 PM
Quote from: milk on November 23, 2020, 04:24:22 PMBut it'd be gaslighting to say Trum isn't doing damage.

Trump has done damage.  In some cases, specifically pertaining to existing international security arrangements and mechanisms, such damage is badly needed.  Much more is needed.  But that will have to wait.  Depending on how one views other policies he has pursued - most of which are variants of existing Republican policy preferences - he can be said to have done damage to all manner of "liberal" shibboleths.  That is sometimes good, sometimes bad.  Mostly it is good.  One can argue that Trump eroded trust in the press, but the improvement in the financial condition of at least some news outlets contradicts that, and one would have to view a decrease in trust in the press in the broader context of decades long changes and a more splintered media environment, which Trump did not create.  I constantly see statements that Trump has eroded trust in democracy and democratic institutions, but the incontrovertible evidence regarding voter turnout and the nature of many races this year directly contradicts that.  Trump will fade from memory over time, his unilateral actions will in some cases be reversed or altered - though in some cases they will not - and existing political institutions will survive and adapt.  The republic will survive. 

It often seems that Trump has created dueling cults of personality.  There are his avid followers, people who voted for him and believed him, but there are also his vociferous opponents, some of whom write and say hysterical things, and who attribute power to him, political or otherwise, that he simply does not possess.


Quote from: milk on November 23, 2020, 04:24:22 PMHe hasn't stolen the election, though he wants to. I'm not sure what you think.

I do not claim to know what Trump really wants.  No one on this forum knows that.  They believe certain things, though.  That's fine.  But belief is not fact.  Belief is not knowledge.  I think it is safe to believe Trump wanted to be reelected, and he has engaged in all manner of legal actions to maintain power, but unless someone has actual evidence that he has violated statutes - not norms, but statutes - in his actions, the complaints are merely ideological.  That's also fine, but it is not factual. 


Quote from: milk on November 23, 2020, 04:24:22 PMSometimes you've seemed to intimate that this kind of chaos is good because it weakens the federal government.

I have been very clear for many years that chaos and dysfunction that weakens the federal government is unambiguously good and should be encouraged at all times. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 23, 2020, 07:00:41 PM
Quote from: milk on November 23, 2020, 04:24:22 PM
It's fine to be a stickler on these things. And then you stop short. But it'd be gaslighting to say Trum isn't doing damage. Millions of people live in a dangerous alternate reality where dark forces have outright stolen the election.

     The manly militia men who were supposed to play their part decided to spend more time with their families. It wasn't supposed to be that way. As a result of their treachery, Repubs were intimidated into obeying the law.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 23, 2020, 07:30:42 PM
     Trump tells us what he thinks. I don't see how "not knowing very much about it" applies. We are beyond reasonable doubt here. If his "American Carnage" had showed up on schedule it might have given his toadies the courage of their lack of convictions.

     I have a theory, something along the lines of a beauty contest process.  As the court cases collapsed Repubs began to think that other Repubs were thinking Trump was finished and may not protect them from the consequences of their evil deeds. It snowballed into a Repub hellscape of legality.

     It's maybe a little bit paranoid, but put yourself in the mind of a Repub who's not entirely on board with QAnon and trying to maintain bourgeois respectability.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 23, 2020, 08:32:57 PM
Quote from: Todd on November 23, 2020, 05:20:55 PM
Trump has done damage.  In some cases, specifically pertaining to existing international security arrangements and mechanisms, such damage is badly needed.  Much more is needed.  But that will have to wait.  Depending on how one views other policies he has pursued - most of which are variants of existing Republican policy preferences - he can be said to have done damage to all manner of "liberal" shibboleths.  That is sometimes good, sometimes bad.  Mostly it is good.  One can argue that Trump eroded trust in the press, but the improvement in the financial condition of at least some news outlets contradicts that, and one would have to view a decrease in trust in the press in the broader context of decades long changes and a more splintered media environment, which Trump did not create.  I constantly see statements that Trump has eroded trust in democracy and democratic institutions, but the incontrovertible evidence regarding voter turnout and the nature of many races this year directly contradicts that.  Trump will fade from memory over time, his unilateral actions will in some cases be reversed or altered - though in some cases they will not - and existing political institutions will survive and adapt.  The republic will survive. 

It often seems that Trump has created dueling cults of personality.  There are his avid followers, people who voted for him and believed him, but there are also his vociferous opponents, some of whom write and say hysterical things, and who attribute power to him, political or otherwise, that he simply does not possess.


I do not claim to know what Trump really wants.  No one on this forum knows that.  They believe certain things, though.  That's fine.  But belief is not fact.  Belief is not knowledge.  I think it is safe to believe Trump wanted to be reelected, and he has engaged in all manner of legal actions to maintain power, but unless someone has actual evidence that he has violated statutes - not norms, but statutes - in his actions, the complaints are merely ideological.  That's also fine, but it is not factual. 


I have been very clear for many years that chaos and dysfunction that weakens the federal government is unambiguously good and should be encouraged at all times.
Thanks for the clarifications. I disagree with you on a few points here (voter turnout is not the only measure of democracies' health) but mostly it makes sense to me though, again, I don't desire all/most of the same political outcomes as you.  I understand that some voters disregarded his gory personality because of policy while others, living in some bizarro world, actually like him.   
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 23, 2020, 08:48:30 PM

     It would be terrible if Trump managed to steal a low turnout election. Would it be better if turnout was high? I'm not sophisticated enough to see how.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 23, 2020, 08:59:47 PM

     Conservative snowflake Bret Stephens has thoughts on Weimar America.

     Trump Contrives His Stab-in-the-Back Myth (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/23/opinion/trump-biden-conspiracy-theory.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage)

In case certain readers think I'm making a comparison between Trump supporters and Nazis, let me emphasize that I am not. What I am saying is that this modern-day Dolchstosslegende, like surf pounding against a bluff, abets future demagogues by eroding public confidence in democratic institutions, until, unprotected, they collapse.

No comparison with the Weimar years is complete without noting that the republic wasn't just done in. It did a lot to do itself in, too, mostly through economic mismanagement. All the more reason to wish the Biden administration well as it navigates crises that now include some of the most disreputable opponents our own republic has ever known.


     All is forgiven for mentioning economic mismanagement.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 23, 2020, 09:59:23 PM
How much of Trum's ugly ascendency is an outcome of social media? I'm still not seeing the good side of that either (although here I am typing away).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on November 23, 2020, 11:20:47 PM
I've noted that this time Twitter, which in spite of its reputation can actually be a good and extremely updated news source as regards links to in-depth journalist stories or live reporting, including on-site videos, has become too flooded with propaganda-, extremist- or very simple-minded spamming, so that you'll struggle between 100s of tweets to find something of value there. Which is sad and generally corroding.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 24, 2020, 12:11:46 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 23, 2020, 05:20:55 PM
Trump will fade from memory over time, his unilateral actions will in some cases be reversed or altered - though in some cases they will not - and existing political institutions will survive and adapt.  The republic will survive. 

It often seems that Trump has created dueling cults of personality.  There are his avid followers, people who voted for him and believed him, but there are also his vociferous opponents, some of whom write and say hysterical things, and who attribute power to him, political or otherwise, that he simply does not possess.

This.

And related to the last paragraph: the polarization has become so sharp that the mere stating of facts contradicting, or expressing of opinions not in line with, anti-Trumpism automatically turns one into a Trumpist.

QuoteI think it is safe to believe Trump wanted to be reelected, and he has engaged in all manner of legal actions to maintain power, but unless someone has actual evidence that he has violated statutes - not norms, but statutes - in his actions, the complaints are merely ideological.  That's also fine, but it is not factual. 

And this.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 24, 2020, 12:53:13 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 24, 2020, 12:11:46 AM
This.

And related to the last paragraph: the polarization has become so sharp that the mere stating of facts contradicting, or expressing of opinions not in line with, anti-Trumpism automatically turns one into a Trumpist.

And this.
It's a beehive, as my friend said to me. No one can talk about anything anymore (aside from on this friendly forum). But I'm so glad for tump to be gone. He's made it worse for sure. And no one can match him for lies and hysterics.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 24, 2020, 01:02:26 AM
Twitter has always been the worst.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 24, 2020, 02:11:58 AM
Those testimonies in the Michigan hearings yesterday were intriguing.

I cannot tell if these were merely anecdotal or whether they pointed to systematic attempts by observers from the Republican party, to intimidate and harrass the volunteers counting the ballots. Getting too close, challenging every single ballot, deliberately going without a mask and shouting and breathing on the people counting the ballots.

There was this kid from UM Law School, who I had expected (based on his preppy hale looks) to be a Republican, who talked about this observer who shouted at him that he wasn't there to observe the law, but to do what the party had told him.

I'd like some more reporting on this behavior. If this kind of low jinks happened all over the country.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 24, 2020, 03:06:04 AM
Quote from: Herman on November 24, 2020, 02:11:58 AM
Those testimonies in the Michigan hearings yesterday were intriguing.

I cannot tell if these were merely anecdotal or whether they pointed to systematic attempts by observers from the Republican party, to intimidate and harrass the volunteers counting the ballots. Getting too close, challenging every single ballot, deliberately going without a mask and shouting and breathing on the people counting the ballots.

There was this kid from UM Law School, who I had expected (based on his preppy hale looks) to be a Republican, who talked about this observer who shouted at him that he wasn't there to observe the law, but to do what the party had told him.

I'd like some more reporting on this behavior. If this kind of low jinks happened all over the country.
Yes, I'd like to know if/how/when/where these kind of things happened.  Looking at some footage on the Detroit Free Press's website, things were 'hairy' to say the least outside of at least one polling area.

Woke up to great news this morning:  DSA Emily Murphy has ascertained the election.  Copy here of the letter that she sent to President-Elect Joe Biden:  http://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2020/images/11/23/gsa.biden.pdf

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 24, 2020, 04:00:54 AM
Just hearing a story on CNN now about dark money and ghost candidates who siphoned off votes to help other republicans win three positions in the Florida senate race.  It might not be illegal, but it certainly should be!

https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/23/politics/florida-dark-money-mystery-invs/index.html

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 24, 2020, 04:54:08 AM
Quote from: milk on November 23, 2020, 08:32:57 PMvoter turnout is not the only measure of democracies' health

True, but underlying the massive turnout were equally massive get out the vote drives, fundraisers, outreach programs, social media campaigns, etc.  Trump was the catalyst, but it took huge efforts by a lot of people to result in what happened November 3.  A lot of people have such a bizarre fixation on Trump, and so wholly believe the standard press narrative about failing democratic institutions and such forth, that they ignore what just happened. 


Quote from: Florestan on November 24, 2020, 12:11:46 AMAnd related to the last paragraph: the polarization has become so sharp that the mere stating of facts contradicting, or expressing of opinions not in line with, anti-Trumpism automatically turns one into a Trumpist.

It's groupthink.  A lot of places, and a lot of internet forums, display it. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 24, 2020, 05:19:36 AM
Quote from: milk on November 23, 2020, 09:59:23 PM
How much of Trum's ugly ascendency is an outcome of social media? I'm still not seeing the good side of that either (although here I am typing away).

     What's new is everyone has a printing press for their radical screeds. The content resembles past episodes of mass hysteria.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on November 24, 2020, 05:55:37 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on November 24, 2020, 04:00:54 AM
Just hearing a story on CNN now about dark money and ghost candidates who siphoned off votes to help other republicans win three positions in the Florida senate race.  It might not be illegal, but it certainly should be!

https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/23/politics/florida-dark-money-mystery-invs/index.html

PD

Trumpettes were asked to believe that only Democrats would cheat ... humm.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on November 24, 2020, 06:03:20 AM
The bottom line is that if the conservative view of reality was correct, Trump would have won the election with over 51% of the popular vote.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 24, 2020, 06:16:11 AM
this is third grade logic; the same as Trump used to use when he said "But I'm the president and you're not"  -  usually to reporters to had no desire to be president.

The reason why the evidence at the impeachment hearing went nowhere was that there were more republicans than democrats in the room.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 24, 2020, 06:23:46 AM
     Roger Stone-Tied Group Threatens GOP: If Trump Goes Down, So Does Your Senate Majority (https://www.thedailybeast.com/roger-stone-tied-group-threatens-gop-if-trump-goes-down-so-does-your-senate-majority?ref=home)

The effort is representative of a broader push among some of President Trump's most devoted supporters to withhold support for the two Georgia Republican senators facing competitive runoff challenges, Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue, in the hope of leveraging the party's fear of losing the U.S. Senate to get more establishment backing for their drive to change the result of the election. The goal, those operatives say, is to expose a supposed vast election-fraud conspiracy abetted by high-level Republicans in Georgia's state government, including Gov. Brian Kemp and Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger.

     This is starting to remind me of the existentialist Godfather who makes you an offer no one understands.

     GMG groupthinkers should be baffled by this. We might have to regroup to confront this challenge.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 24, 2020, 06:26:18 AM
Quote from: arpeggio on November 24, 2020, 06:03:20 AM
The bottom line is that if the conservative view of reality was correct, Trump would have won the election with over 51% of the popular vote.

If I understand your logic correctly,  the conservative view of reality was correct in 1984 when Reagan won 58.8% of the popular vote (and 525 electoral votes, the most ever), carrying all states but Minnesota and the District of Columbia. Is that right?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on November 24, 2020, 08:09:35 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 24, 2020, 06:26:18 AM
If I understand your logic correctly,  the conservative view of reality was correct in 1984 when Reagan won 58.8% of the popular vote (and 525 electoral votes, the most ever), carrying all states but Minnesota and the District of Columbia. Is that right?

No.  Your statement is based on the supposition that the Republicans of today are just like the Republicans of thirty-five years ago.  Back then the Republicans had a better grasp of reality.  I was a Reagan conservative and the Republicans of today are nothing like the Republicans of 1980.  The party has changed.  One can not compare the the Republicans of today with the Republicans of 1980.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 24, 2020, 08:32:37 AM
Quote from: arpeggio on November 24, 2020, 08:09:35 AM
No.  Your statement is based on the supposition that the Republicans of today are just like the Republicans of thirty-five years ago.  Back then the Republicans had a better grasp of reality.  I was a Reagan conservative and the Republicans of today are nothing like the Republicans of 1980.  The party has changed.  One can not compare the the Republicans of today with the Republicans of 1980.

Yes, the Republicans had a much better grasp of reality in the 80's. Reagan was a mixed bag, but superior to the Republican 21st century presidents G. W. Bush and D. Trump. Obama was "Reagan of the 21st century", also a mixed bag president.

Both the Republicans and the Democrats have moved to the right on economic issues since the 80's. On social issues (gay marriage etc.) the Dems have been moving to left. On economic issues the corporate Dems today are what the Republicans used to be back in the 80's. ObamaCare for example is originally a Republican healthcare plan from the 80's. If you liked the Republicans of the 80's, corporate Dems of today should be your cup of tea unless you find them too liberal on social issues that is...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 24, 2020, 10:13:32 AM
Quote from: arpeggio on November 24, 2020, 08:09:35 AM
No.  Your statement is based on the supposition that the Republicans of today are just like the Republicans of thirty-five years ago.  Back then the Republicans had a better grasp of reality.  I was a Reagan conservative and the Republicans of today are nothing like the Republicans of 1980.  The party has changed.  One can not compare the the Republicans of today with the Republicans of 1980.

None of this answers my question (it was a question, not a statement) but never mind.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on November 24, 2020, 10:40:28 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 24, 2020, 10:13:32 AM
None of this answers my question (it was a question, not a statement) but never mind.

I thought I did answer your question.  The Republicans in the 1980's had a better grasp of reality.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 24, 2020, 11:38:32 AM
Quote from: arpeggio on November 24, 2020, 10:40:28 AM
I did answer your question.  The Republicans in the 1980's had a better grasp of reality.

Indeed. Any grasp of reality would be a better grasp.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 24, 2020, 12:11:16 PM

     Will we get transition missiles from Lil Kim? Watch the skies.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on November 24, 2020, 01:46:58 PM
Quote from: Herman on November 24, 2020, 01:02:26 AM
Twitter has always been the worst.

Sorry, no. You can be ahead of most media & identify what they'll only later revise, and find a lot of real journalist material there, especially via links, for subjects not covered that much by main media, as I said. The problem is that it's been increasingly invaded by organized propaganda on a large scale, and ignorant or crazy, or ignorant+crazy, stuff.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Zeus on November 24, 2020, 04:18:05 PM
Quote from: Todd on November 23, 2020, 05:20:55 PM
Trump has done damage. 

I particularly enjoyed watching Trump's attacks on the rule of law.  Good for lawyers' wallets, and everybody else.

Nothing more invigorating than being forced to fight for what you believe in.

All is for the best in the best of all possible countries.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 24, 2020, 04:26:49 PM
It Actually Was a Landslide: 80 Million Votes and Counting For Biden
The "red mirage" has vanished to reveal a blue mandate for President-Elect Joe Biden
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/landslide-80-million-votes-biden-trump-1092217/
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 24, 2020, 04:58:40 PM
Quote from: Zeus on November 24, 2020, 04:18:05 PMI particularly enjoyed watching Trump's attacks on the rule of law.

It was fun to watch, especially with the thumping the rule of law gave Trump.


Quote from: milk on November 24, 2020, 04:26:49 PM
It Actually Was a Landslide: 80 Million Votes and Counting For Biden
The "red mirage" has vanished to reveal a blue mandate for President-Elect Joe Biden
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/landslide-80-million-votes-biden-trump-1092217/

Biden received 51.1% of the vote.  By definition, that is not a landslide, no matter how large the font.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 24, 2020, 05:15:26 PM
Local yokels in action: Portland progressives plot recall effort against Mayor Ted Wheeler, Commissioner Dan Ryan (https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/2020/11/portland-progressives-plot-recall-effort-against-mayor-ted-wheeler-commissioner-dan-ryan.html)

Ted Wheeler was a turd over the summer, but newbie Dan Ryan's recall worthy offense was not supporting a move to defund the police.  National politics may settle down, but Stumptown progressives are just getting started.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 24, 2020, 06:36:14 PM
Quote from: Todd on November 24, 2020, 04:58:40 PM
It was fun to watch, especially with the thumping the rule of law gave Trump.


Biden received 51.1% of the vote.  By definition, that is not a landslide, no matter how large the font.
Granted. Regan (only in the second election) and Nixon did much better.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 24, 2020, 11:40:08 PM
While Trump and Barr are preparing the pardons they'll issue, they're speeding up the executions in the various states where the death penalty is still, barbarously, on the books.

No president in the 20th century has allowed death sentences to be executed during the lame duck months. Trump, as we know since the Central Park Five, actually feels better when people get killed at his behest.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 25, 2020, 12:10:51 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 24, 2020, 04:58:40 PM
It was fun to watch, especially with the thumping the rule of law gave Trump.

What's even funnier is how many people here see Trump's "Fascist" presidency as evidence that the USA has become a banana republic, when in fact the last four years have proved exactly the opposite, namely that the USA is not a banana republic. In a banana republic Trump would have been proclaimed president for life by the parliament and confimed as such by a national referendum; opposition politicians, journalists, bloggers etc would have been killed, jailed or (self-) exiled; any trace of a free press would have disappeared; the judiciary would have turned into a branch of the executive, taking orders (and obeying them unconditionally) directly from Trump; the economy would have been mismanaged and ruined; most people would have barely made it from day to day; and an armed clandestine opposition movement would have started a civil war, possibly with USA backup and financing. Of course, none of these happened in the USA during Trump's "Fascist" presidency, better said Trump did not even try to achieve them, unsubstantiated allegations to the contrary notwithstanding. Now, if he didn't try because he did not want them, then he is not a true Fascist; if he didn't try because he feared legal consequences, then he is still not a true Fascist, because a true Fascist would have taken seriously the Fascist lema "Vivere pericolosamente!" and taken his chances. This is what Mussolini, a true Fascist, did with the March on Rome: he gambled and won.

Besides, if someone like Trump had been really able to damage and render effectiveless the rule of law in, and the democratic institutions of, the USA then they wouldn't have been worth much to begin with. But that's obviously not the case. The rule of law has been up and running during Trump's "Fascist" presidency and lost no opportunity to give him the middle finger. And if he will persist till the end in his misguided stubborness it might even give him a nice pair of handcuffs and a nicely dressed police escort --- and as I said before, that would really make my day because it'll be the ultimate evidence for what I've maintained all these four years, namely that the USA has never been anything else than a constitutional republic ruled by law.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 25, 2020, 12:30:42 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 24, 2020, 04:58:40 PM
Biden received 51.1% of the vote.  By definition, that is not a landslide, no matter how large the font.

Biden did not get the landslide he should have gotten against Trump. Biden should have won about 400 electoral votes against an incompetent fool, but he did not because the corporate Dems suck.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 25, 2020, 12:40:29 AM
I'm generally not a partisan of death penalty but sometimes ny views on the matter are seriously challenged. For instance in this case:

Prosecutors say Bourgeois tortured, sexually molested, and then beat his two-and-a-half-year-old daughter to death. Court records say Bourgeois repeatedly beat the young girl and punched her in the face, whipped her with an electrical cord and beat her with a belt so hard that it broke. He also allegedly burned her feet with a cigarette lighter and hit her in the head with a baseball bat until her head swelled.

I do wonder if such a person really deserves to be fed and clothed and have his health attended at the expenses of the public in the hope that someday he'll turn into a normal human being worth being reintegrated in the society.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 25, 2020, 12:57:33 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 25, 2020, 12:40:29 AM
I'm generally not a partisan of death penalty but sometimes ny views on the matter are seriously challenged. For instance in this case:

Prosecutors say Bourgeois tortured, sexually molested, and then beat his two-and-a-half-year-old daughter to death. Court records say Bourgeois repeatedly beat the young girl and punched her in the face, whipped her with an electrical cord and beat her with a belt so hard that it broke. He also allegedly burned her feet with a cigarette lighter and hit her in the head with a baseball bat until her head swelled.

I do wonder if such a person really deserves to be fed and clothed and have his health attended at the expenses of the public in the hope that someday he'll turn into a normal human being worth being reintegrated in the society.

Who is this Bourgeois monster you are talking about? The worst Romanian person ever?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 25, 2020, 01:02:52 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 25, 2020, 12:57:33 AM
Who is this Bourgeois monster you are talking about?

One of the three persons scheduled to be executed iin the USA in the next two months. (See post #585)


Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on November 25, 2020, 01:05:16 AM
Death penalty also illustrates the brutality of the surrounding society implementing it, cf. China etc. I don't know how many American movies I've seen pointing to the sadistic death of various low- and high-level criminals, or undefined exotic natives, as a very deserved one ...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Que on November 25, 2020, 01:13:02 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 25, 2020, 12:40:29 AM

I do wonder if such a person really deserves to be fed and clothed and have his health attended at the expenses of the public in the hope that someday he'll turn into a normal human being worth being reintegrated in the society.

I think we'll have to accept that reintegration is not for everyone, but that doesn't mean we have to kill them.
In the Netherlands life is life (incarceration till you die) and the incarnation of the criminally insane can be prolonged indefinitely (and in many cases is)

There is that infamous statement of George W Bush in which he said that he would in favour of abolishing the death penalty if he thought ever an innocent persont had been put to death. Of course, there have been several cases of innocent put to death. In most cases later proven by DNA tests, or by dismissal of purposely fabricated evidence or false testimonies.

Q
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 25, 2020, 01:19:50 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 25, 2020, 12:10:51 AM
What's even funnier is how many people here see Trump's "Fascist" presidency as evidence that the USA has become a banana republic, when in fact the last four years have proved exactly the opposite, namely that the USA is not a banana republic. In a banana republic Trump would have been proclaimed president for life by the parliament and confimed as such by a national referendum; opposition politicians, journalists, bloggers etc would have been killed, jailed or (self-) exiled; any trace of a free press would have disappeared; the judiciary would have turned into a branch of the executive, taking orders (and obeying them unconditionally) directly from Trump; the economy would have been mismanaged and ruined; most people would have barely made it from day to day; and an armed clandestine opposition movement would have started a civil war, possibly with USA backup and financing. Of course, none of these happened in the USA during Trump's "Fascist" presidency, better said Trump did not even try to achieve them, unsubstantiated allegations to the contrary notwithstanding. Now, if he didn't try because he did not want them, then he is not a true Fascist; if he didn't try because he feared legal consequences, then he is still not a true Fascist, because a true Fascist would have taken seriously the Fascist lema "Vivere pericolosamente!" and taken his chances. This is what Mussolini, a true Fascist, did with the March on Rome: he gambled and won.

I never claimed all of this will happen, but Trump's actions moved the US a bit closer to a place like this. Instead of 100 yards away, the US is 94 yards away. If the US presidents keep moving the country to this direction, someday it becomes a banana republic. According to TYT there was a 1-10 % chance Trump manages to do a coup. The problem of this all is it normalizes non-democratic rethoric. From now on it is "normal" for the president of the US to attack journalists and demand millions of votes not to be counted. Democracy will erode if it is not protected, and Trump defenitely did not protect democracy. All we can hope is Biden can move the country back to where it was before Trump.

Quote from: Florestan on November 25, 2020, 12:10:51 AMBesides, if someone like Trump had been really able to damage and render effectiveless the rule of law in, and the democratic institutions of, the USA then they wouldn't have been worth much to begin with. But that's obviously not the case. The rule of law has been up and running during Trump's "Fascist" presidency and lost no opportunity to give him the middle finger. And if he will persist till the end in his misguided stubborness it might even give him a nice pair of handcuffs and a nicely dressed police escort --- and as I said before, that would really make my day because it'll be the ultimate evidence for what I've maintained all these four years, namely that the USA has never been anything else than a constitutional republic ruled by law.

The US has had a two-tier system of law. Mild sentences for the rich, harsh sentences for the poor/non-white.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 25, 2020, 01:22:27 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 25, 2020, 01:02:52 AM
One of the three persons scheduled to be executed iin the USA in the next two months. (See post #585)

Oh. Thanks. Sorry, I have been lazy to read this thread in my efforts to engage less in the US politics.

EDIT:  Herman doesn't mention the names in his post #585
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 25, 2020, 01:59:13 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 25, 2020, 01:22:27 AM
Oh. Thanks. Sorry, I have been lazy to read this thread in my efforts to engage less in the US politics.

EDIT:  Herman doesn't mention the names in his post #585

No but --- I quote you --- it took me five seconds to find them on Google.  :)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 25, 2020, 02:03:03 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 25, 2020, 01:19:50 AM
Trump's actions moved the US a bit closer to a place like this. Instead of 100 yards away, the US is 94 yards away. If the US presidents keep moving the country to this direction, someday it becomes a banana republic. According to TYT there was a 1-10 % chance Trump manages to do a coup.

Nonsense on stilts.

QuoteDemocracy will erode if it is not protected, and Trump defenitely did not protect democracy.

The POTUS is not the only protection democracy has in the USA. The judiciary is at least as important as the executive in this respect and as we see these days the former is even stronger than the latter. Also, the extreme federalism makes the demise of USA democracy highly improbable.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on November 25, 2020, 04:06:15 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 25, 2020, 02:03:03 AM
...
The POTUS is not the only protection democracy has in the USA. The judiciary is at least as important as the executive in this respect and as we see these days the former is even stronger than the latter. Also, the extreme federalism makes the demise of USA democracy highly improbable.

The USA isn't in imminent danger of dictatorship;  it is fairly well protected by its constitution and "checks and balances" system, however that protection isn't impervious.

As for the judiciary, let's remember "Article II of the U.S. Constitution provides that federal judges are appointed by the President, with the "advice and consent" of the Senate. Presidents generally appoint federal judges who share their political beliefs and philosophy." see for example ... http://adacourse.org/courtconcepts/intro.html (http://adacourse.org/courtconcepts/intro.html)  When the Senate is compliant with the President as in case of the current body, then the judiciary will potentially become highly politicised.

Donald Trump isn't a "fascist" per se;  he isn't ideological.  However Trump is a populist and would-be authoritarian;  implicitly if not explicitly he believes in the "unitary executive" theory:  see ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unitary_executive_theory (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unitary_executive_theory)  He has amply demonstrated this by appointing Cabinet and advisor based on loyalty and willingness to do his will, rather than on competence -- apparently the includes his Attorney General, speaking of the judiciary.

Probably the greatest attack on democracy by Trump is his fostering of the "stolen election" mythology which, though totally baseless, undermines confidence in the elections process -- we need to consider that 100+ million Americans believe in this "big lie".

"It can't happen here" is not a mistake Americans should make.  For decades I have believe that by far the greatest threat to American democracy and hence the American way of life, is from the right-leaning populist authoritarianism, not from Communism, socialism, nor the "far left".  I've never be more convinced of this than recently.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 25, 2020, 04:47:01 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 25, 2020, 12:10:51 AMwhat I've maintained all these four years, namely that the USA has never been anything else than a constitutional republic ruled by law.


Yes, of course it is. 

What we've just experienced, and continue to experience though to a lesser degree, is sensationalist press coverage misrepresenting the power of the presidency and the weakness of other institutions, and doing so on a repeated, daily (hourly) basis, to the point that the "news" resembles nothing less than political propaganda.  A good chunk of people are so blinded by partisanship and ideology, that they believe the stories and begin spinning more fanciful yarns of their own.  Eventually, we witnessed people proclaiming that the US is a banana republic and that Trump would steal the election and serve multiple terms, not as a joke, but with complete and nervous earnestness, over and over. 

All the while, from day one of Trump's presidency, existing institutions continued to function.  Congress passed precious little meaningful legislation - which they do with every administration.  Courts ruled against Trump's actions from the get-go - which they do with every administration.  State and local leaders refused to follow presidential mandates - which they do with every administration.  The main difference was the ubiquity and sensationalism of the press coverage.

It apparently remains difficult for many people to remember the power of the presidency, as concerns about the fate of the republic inevitably center on the president.  The president has the power to literally destroy another country on command.  The president cannot order a stop sign installed at the end of my street.  And then people on the left conveniently forget that historically, in the US, the left has been even more set on expanding the power of the presidency, starting no later than Wilson.  The executive branch should be weakened substantially.  That is the best way to prevent an overly powerful executive.  The opposite will be advocated starting on January 20th, 2021.

Yes, I suppose it could happen here.  Whatever it is.  And depending on what the meaning of the word "is" is.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 25, 2020, 05:31:59 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 25, 2020, 12:10:51 AM
What's even funnier is how many people here see Trump's "Fascist" presidency as evidence that the USA has become a banana republic, when in fact the last four years have proved exactly the opposite, namely that the USA is not a banana republic. In a banana republic Trump would have been proclaimed president for life by the parliament and confimed as such by a national referendum; opposition politicians, journalists, bloggers etc would have been killed, jailed or (self-) exiled; any trace of a free press would have disappeared; the judiciary would have turned into a branch of the executive, taking orders (and obeying them unconditionally) directly from Trump; the economy would have been mismanaged and ruined; most people would have barely made it from day to day; and an armed clandestine opposition movement would have started a civil war, possibly with USA backup and financing. Of course, none of these happened in the USA during Trump's "Fascist" presidency, better said Trump did not even try to achieve them, unsubstantiated allegations to the contrary notwithstanding. Now, if he didn't try because he did not want them, then he is not a true Fascist; if he didn't try because he feared legal consequences, then he is still not a true Fascist, because a true Fascist would have taken seriously the Fascist lema "Vivere pericolosamente!" and taken his chances. This is what Mussolini, a true Fascist, did with the March on Rome: he gambled and won.

Besides, if someone like Trump had been really able to damage and render effectiveless the rule of law in, and the democratic institutions of, the USA then they wouldn't have been worth much to begin with. But that's obviously not the case. The rule of law has been up and running during Trump's "Fascist" presidency and lost no opportunity to give him the middle finger. And if he will persist till the end in his misguided stubborness it might even give him a nice pair of handcuffs and a nicely dressed police escort --- and as I said before, that would really make my day because it'll be the ultimate evidence for what I've maintained all these four years, namely that the USA has never been anything else than a constitutional republic ruled by law.
It's a bit of a straw man. I doubt most critics in this vein were saying this. I don't know, maybe I'm wrong. There were regulations put into place after Nixon and perhaps they need updating. Trump mixed his business with government to some degree, put his businesses into a practically meaningless blind trust, had government officials revolving through his admin in a whimsical way, he had inexperienced and unqualified family around him as advisors, etc. There's stuff like that that made people say, "oh, he's acting from the playbook of a tin-pot dictator." I agree that it's a lot more to do with his personality and that he was constrained by a system that mostly "works." Trum wanted to choose his electorate rather than the way it worked out according to the system: The electorate didn't choose him. However, by vomiting a constant stream of lies and bringing along a coterie of liars, he convinced millions of dummies that he only lost because of fraud. The republicans still want to pick their electorate by pushing the fraud narrative and they tried to influence the system to do it. Trump ginned up the conspiracy by getting his voters to vote in-person and repubs had those votes counted first. Trump was lying about how mail-ins were fraud votes months back in the hope of tarnishing the legitimacy of the process and altering the wishes of the electorate. It didn't work this time. Maybe it's all about fundraising and keeping an hysterical base of devotees to con, fund his legal battles or draw on to support a future run. No, he's not a fascist and he didn't turn the U.S. into the movie Bananas. He did act like that and it's a mystery whether he believes what comes out of his own mouth as it's clear his white house staff cannot possibly believe his nonsense.       
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 25, 2020, 05:38:57 AM
Progressives reveal their love of and unending desire for expanded executive authority:  Climate Groups Prod Biden to Bolster Kerry by Declaring Crisis (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-25/climate-groups-prod-biden-to-bolster-kerry-by-declaring-crisis)

Quote from: Ari NatterInvoking a climate emergency could give Biden the authority to circumvent Congress and fund clean energy projects, shut down crude oil exports, suspend offshore drilling and curtail the movement of fossil fuels on pipelines, trains, and ships, according to a research note by consulting firm ClearView Energy Partners.

Unbounded executive authority unhampered by Congress is apparently good now.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 25, 2020, 06:37:36 AM
Quote from: milk on November 25, 2020, 05:31:59 AM
It's a bit of a straw man. I doubt most critics in this vein were saying this. I don't know, maybe I'm wrong. There were regulations put into place after Nixon and perhaps they need updating. Trump mixed his business with government to some degree, put his businesses into a practically meaningless blind trust, had government officials revolving through his admin in a whimsical way, he had inexperienced and unqualified family around him as advisors, etc. There's stuff like that that made people say, "oh, he's acting from the playbook of a tin-pot dictator." I agree that it's a lot more to do with his personality and that he was constrained by a system that mostly "works." Trum wanted to choose his electorate rather than the way it worked out according to the system: The electorate did choose him. However, by vomiting a constant stream of lies and bringing along a coterie of liars, he convinced millions of dummies that he only lost because of fraud. The republicans still want to pick their electorate by pushing the fraud narrative and they tried to influence the system to do it. Trump ginned up the conspiracy by getting his voters to vote in-person and repubs had those votes counted first. Trump was lying about how mail-ins were fraud votes months back in the hope of tarnishing the legitimacy of the process and altering the wishes of the electorate. It didn't work this time. Maybe it's all about fundraising and keeping an hysterical base of devotees to con, fund his legal battles or draw on to support a future run. No, he's not a fascist and he didn't turn the U.S. into the movie Bananas. He did act like that and it's a mystery whether he believes what comes out of his own mouth as it's clear his white house staff cannot possibly believe his nonsense.       

    Trump thought he could steal an election using propaganda about his opponent stealing it as one of the tools. It's right out of the handbook of "let's not call them" fascists and unaffiliated thugs.

     Why is it not apparent that the US system is weaker and more vulnerable to subversion that was thought a few years ago, and that Trump didn't create the cracks but exploited them? The Biden administration has a big job of building and repairing, and one area is the election process itself.

     The good news we can take from the election is that under very difficult conditions the huge expansion of mail voting was a great success. Recounts and audits have revealed that it's been accurate and has given us a means to allow very high voter participation with safety and the highest level of security. That's a big healthy part of the system to improve on.

Quote from: Todd on November 25, 2020, 05:38:57 AM
Progressives reveal their love of and unending desire for expanded executive authority:  Climate Groups Prod Biden to Bolster Kerry by Declaring Crisis (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-25/climate-groups-prod-biden-to-bolster-kerry-by-declaring-crisis)

Unbounded executive authority unhampered by Congress is apparently good now.

     Congress should exercise its authority if it doesn't want the executive to fill the void. If Congress ignores its responsibilities the void is filled in a "not new under the sun" way.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 25, 2020, 06:57:37 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 25, 2020, 01:59:13 AM
No but --- I quote you --- it took me five seconds to find them on Google.  :)

I did Google the name and it gave me rubbish, because I did not know the context:

bourgeois
/ˈbʊəʒwɑː/
adjective
belonging to or characteristic of the middle class, typically with reference to its perceived materialistic values or conventional attitudes.
"a rich, bored, bourgeois family"
synonyms: middle-class, property-owning, propertied, shopkeeping, conventional, traditional, conservative, conformist, ordinary, commonplace, provincial, parochial, suburban, small-town, parish-pump

noun
a bourgeois person.
"a self-confessed and proud bourgeois"
synonyms: member of the middle class, property owner


Googling "Bourgeois death penalty" gives better results, but needs better knowledge of the context which I did not have, because you did not make it clear your post was related to Herman's infamous post #585.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 25, 2020, 07:07:14 AM
     Millions face benefits and evictions cliff as Congress remains stalled on relief talks (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/11/25/power-up-millions-face-benefits-evictions-cliff-congress-remains-stalled-relief-talks/)

     Who's holding a gun to Mitch's head to make him ignore the greatest economic crisis since the GD? Why would anyone waste brain cells on "unbounded executive authority"? If that authority was unbounded Trump could spend what it takes to keep people in their homes with food on the table until the all clear sounds. He probably wouldn't, but he can't. Biden won't have unbounded authority either.

     Progressives don't have a separate position on the limits of executive authority that isn't widely held across the spectrum. My view is that "use it or lose it" generally applies, as it does with the War Powers Act.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 25, 2020, 07:20:06 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 25, 2020, 07:07:14 AMWho's holding a gun to Mitch's head to make him ignore the greatest economic crisis since the GD?

Nobody. You have to hold a gun to Mitch's head to make him care about regular people.  :P
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 25, 2020, 07:39:44 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 25, 2020, 06:57:37 AM
I did Google the name and it gave me rubbish, because I did not know the context:

bourgeois
/ˈbʊəʒwɑː/
adjective
belonging to or characteristic of the middle class, typically with reference to its perceived materialistic values or conventional attitudes.
"a rich, bored, bourgeois family"
synonyms: middle-class, property-owning, propertied, shopkeeping, conventional, traditional, conservative, conformist, ordinary, commonplace, provincial, parochial, suburban, small-town, parish-pump

noun
a bourgeois person.
"a self-confessed and proud bourgeois"
synonyms: member of the middle class, property owner


Googling "Bourgeois death penalty" gives better results, but needs better knowledge of the context which I did not have, because you did not make it clear your post was related to Herman's infamous post #585.

I googled "death sentences lame duck", ie keywords from the 585 post.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 25, 2020, 07:49:40 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 25, 2020, 07:20:06 AM
Nobody. You have to hold a gun to Mitch's head to make him care about regular people.  :P

     He would care about the gun. Mitch is fully capable of railing against executive authority when it suits him. Someone will fetch him a high principle that fits the case. Duty and responsibility don't come into it. Bad executives took them away. It's sad.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 25, 2020, 11:22:45 AM
On Saturday, a federal district court judge issued a blistering dismissal of Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. v. Kathy Boockvar. The opinion is a lesson in elementary lawyering—a once-in-a-career missive that I assigned to my first-year law students on Monday, because it reads like a toddler's "What's Wrong With This Picture" exercise for lawyers. No wonder that Chris Christie, who was a U.S. attorney before he was New Jersey's governor, called Trump's legal team a "national embarrassment" in the wake of its dozens of legal failures. The more sobering problem is that, like much of government touched by Donald Trump, the legal system has now been sullied by his spurious attacks—relying on tortured arguments and illusory facts—upon legitimately cast and counted votes. Too bad that—so far—no lawyers have been sanctioned for abusing the courts this way. They should be.

Trump's Embarrassingly Bad Legal Case in Pennsylvania (https://thebulwark.com/trumps-embarrassingly-bad-legal-case-in-pennsylvania/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 25, 2020, 11:39:12 AM
Quote from: Kim Wehle from TheBulwarkThe chance that the Supreme Court will step in and ignore the facts, ignore the law, and ignore the governing procedural rules to snatch the election from Joe Biden and the American people and hand it to Donald Trump is zero.

Irrelevant, Karl, irrelevant. What is the chance as calculated by TYT? --- that is the question (cf. post #593).  ;)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 25, 2020, 02:18:26 PM
Charlie Sykes: "Exit take: We were warned of socialism, but apparently will get Janet Yellen instead. It's almost enough to make you suspect they were scamming us."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 25, 2020, 02:43:18 PM

     The Inside Story of Michigan's Fake Voter Fraud Scandal (https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/11/24/michigan-election-trump-voter-fraud-democracy-440475)

More than any policy enacted or court vacancy filled, Trump's legacy will be his unprecedented assault on the legitimacy of the ballot box. And it will not be considered in isolation. Future iterations of the GOP will make casual insinuations of voter fraud central to the party's brand. The next generation of Republicans will have learned how to sow doubts about election integrity in one breath and in the next breath bemoan the nation's lack of faith in our elections, creating a self-perpetuating justification to cast suspicion on a process that by raw numbers does not appear conducive to keeping them in power.

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 25, 2020, 02:46:29 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 25, 2020, 02:18:26 PM
Charlie Sykes: "Exit take: We were warned of socialism, but apparently will get Janet Yellen instead. It's almost enough to make you suspect they were scamming us."

     Yellen was too short for Trump, now she's just right.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on November 25, 2020, 02:50:50 PM
Quote from: Todd on November 25, 2020, 04:47:01 AM

Yes, of course it is. 

What we've just experienced, and continue to experience though to a lesser degree, is sensationalist press coverage misrepresenting the power of the presidency and the weakness of other institutions, and doing so on a repeated, daily (hourly) basis, to the point that the "news" resembles nothing less than political propaganda.  A good chunk of people are so blinded by partisanship and ideology, that they believe the stories and begin spinning more fanciful yarns of their own.  Eventually, we witnessed people proclaiming that the US is a banana republic and that Trump would steal the election and serve multiple terms, not as a joke, but with complete and nervous earnestness, over and over. 

All the while, from day one of Trump's presidency, existing institutions continued to function.  Congress passed precious little meaningful legislation - which they do with every administration.  Courts ruled against Trump's actions from the get-go - which they do with every administration.  State and local leaders refused to follow presidential mandates - which they do with every administration.  The main difference was the ubiquity and sensationalism of the press coverage.

It apparently remains difficult for many people to remember the power of the presidency, as concerns about the fate of the republic inevitably center on the president.  The president has the power to literally destroy another country on command.  The president cannot order a stop sign installed at the end of my street.  And then people on the left conveniently forget that historically, in the US, the left has been even more set on expanding the power of the presidency, starting no later than Wilson.  The executive branch should be weakened substantially.  That is the best way to prevent an overly powerful executive.  The opposite will be advocated starting on January 20th, 2021.

Yes, I suppose it could happen here.  Whatever it is.  And depending on what the meaning of the word "is" is.

And the failure and incompetence of the Beer Hall Putsch proves the robustness of the Weimar Republic and that this would-be dictator is just a clownish amusement and any newspaper that says otherwise is just peddling hysterical propaganda.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 25, 2020, 03:39:03 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on November 25, 2020, 02:50:50 PM
And the failure and incompetence of the Beer Hall Putsch proves the robustness of the Weimar Republic and that this would-be dictator is just a clownish amusement and any newspaper that says otherwise is just peddling hysterical propaganda.

     Trump was the chief propagandist. The media covered his awfulness, including everything he tried to do, failed to do, and succeeded in doing. It was a sensation, but not a made up one.

     On occasion the media sensationalized the wrong thing. I don't care whether this is old under the sun or new. They got the Russia scandal far more right than wrong, as the Mueller report and the Senate report confirmed in detail. The Ukraine scandal brought about Trump's impeachment and the media got that right, too. They covered the sadistic child separation policy. The sensation wasn't how it was covered, but that it happened. It's not that consoling to me that DHS and ICE continued to function.

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on November 25, 2020, 03:40:42 PM
Quote from: drogulus on November 25, 2020, 03:39:03 PM
     Trump was the chief propagandist. The media covered his awfulness, including everything he tried to do, failed to do, and succeeded in doing. It was a sensation, but not a made up one.

     On occasion the media sensationalized the wrong thing. I don't care whether this is old under the sun or new. They got the Russia scandal far more right than wrong, as the Mueller report and the Senate report confirmed in detail. The Ukraine scandal brought about Trump's impeachment and the media got that right, too. They covered the sadistic child separation policy. The sensation wasn't how it was covered, but that it happened. It's not that consoling to me that DHS and ICE continued to function.

   

I agree, of course.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 25, 2020, 04:35:50 PM

     Will Trump pardon himself for the crimes the media sensationalized him into committing? What about pardoning anyone who might testify sensationally?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on November 25, 2020, 05:19:10 PM
NPR's "Embedded" podcast is doing a series of episodes on Mitch McConnell. The first was on the working relationship he may have with Biden, the sond on his rise, the third and most recent is the first part of a look at his relaxed attitude to campaign finance:

https://www.npr.org/podcasts/510311/embedded
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on November 25, 2020, 08:39:07 PM
Bloomberg:

Mnuchin Plans to Put $455 Billion Beyond Yellen's Easy Reach (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-24/mnuchin-to-put-455-billion-in-funds-out-of-yellen-s-easy-reach?sref=MIBMEEoj)

"Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin will put $455 billion in unspent Cares Act funding into an account that his presumed successor, former Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen, will soon need authorization from Congress to use.

The money will be placed in the agency's General Fund, a Treasury Department spokesperson said Tuesday. Most of it had gone to support Federal Reserve emergency-lending facilities, and Mnuchin's clawback would make it impossible for Yellen as Treasury secretary to restore for that purpose without lawmakers' blessing.

Democrats swiftly criticized the move, with Bharat Ramamurti, a member of the congressionally appointed watchdog panel overseeing Fed and Treasury Covid-19 relief funds, saying "the good news is that it's illegal and can be reversed next year."[...]
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on November 25, 2020, 11:12:08 PM
This seems to be a good survey of #45's expected regulation initiatives before January 20th, besides pardoning (Flynn already pardoned):

https://www.propublica.org/article/trump-races-to-weaken-environmental-and-worker-protections-and-implement-other-last-minute-policies-before-jan-20


Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 25, 2020, 11:17:36 PM
Has there ever been a lame duck session like this?

The pardons are obviously standard, but all these steps to make it harder for the next administration are rather new to me.

And this includes not just the billions Mnuchin is locking up so Biden / Yellen won't have any budget, but also the death row executions.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 26, 2020, 12:03:51 AM
Searching for the USA equivalent(s) of the Beer Hall Putsch I found, among other things, something called The Election Riot of 1874, or Coup of 1874, which took place on election day, November 3, 1874, in an Alabama location. Now, this is a very interesting story. Here it goes (all quotes taken from here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Election_riot_of_1874 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Election_riot_of_1874) and all highlights are mine).

The Election Riot of 1874, or Coup of 1874, took place on election day, November 3, 1874, near Eufaula, Alabama in Barbour County. Freedmen comprised a majority of the population and had been electing Republican candidates to office. Members of an Alabama chapter of the White League, a paramilitary group supporting the Democratic Party's drive to regain conservative political power in the county and state, attacked black Republicans at the polls.

The members of the White League killed at least seven black voters and wounded 70, while driving away more than 1,000 unarmed black people at the polls. In attacking the polling place in Spring Hill, the League influenced the outcome of the elections. They turned all Republicans out of office and Democratic candidates took a majority of offices up for election.

Background

The White League had formed in 1874 as an insurgent, white Democratic paramilitary group in Grant Parish and nearby parishes[1] on the Red River of the South in Louisiana. The League was founded by members of the white militia who had committed the Colfax Massacre in Louisiana in 1873, killing numerous black people in order to turn out Republicans from parish offices as part of the disputed 1872 gubernatorial election. Historians such as George Rabe consider groups such as the White League and Red Shirts as a "military arm" of the Democratic Party. Their members worked openly to disrupt Republican meetings, and attacked and intimidated voters to suppress black voting. They courted press attention rather than operating secretly, as had the Ku Klux Klan.

Chapters spread to Alabama and other states in the Deep South. A similar paramilitary group was the Red Shirts, which originated in Mississippi and became active in the Carolinas. Both paramilitary groups contributed to the Democrats' regaining control in the state legislatures in the late 1870s. The Red Shirts were still active in the 1890s and were implicated in the Wilmington Insurrection of 1898 in North Carolina.[2]
Events

On election day, November 3, 1874, an Alabama chapter of the White League repeated actions taken earlier that year in Vicksburg, Mississippi. They invaded Eufaula, killing at least seven black Republicans, injuring at least 70 more, and driving off more than 1,000 unarmed Republicans from the polls.[3] The group moved on to Spring Hill, where members stormed the polling place, destroying the ballot box, and killing the 16-year-old son of a white Republican judge in their shooting.[4]

The White League refused to count any Republican votes cast. But, Republican voters reflected the black majority in the county, as well as white supporters. They outnumbered Democratic voters by a margin greater than two to one. The League declared the Democratic candidates victorious, forced Republican politicians out of office, and seized every county office in Barbour County in a kind of coup d'état.[5] Such actions were repeated in other parts of the South in the 1870s, as Democrats sought to regain political dominance in states with black majorities and numerous Republican officials. In Barbour County, the Democrats auctioned off as "slaves" (for a maximum cost of $2 per month), or otherwise silenced all Republican witnesses to the events. They were intimidated from testifying to the coup if the case went to federal court.[5]

Legacy

Due to the actual and threatened violence by the White League, black voters began to stay away from the polls in Barbour County. They no longer voted in sufficient number to retain a majority of Republican officeholders. White conservative Democrats continued to intimidate black voters through the late 19th century, especially after a Populist-Republican alliance elected some Fusion candidates in the Deep South, as well as local Republican officials in many states.

In 1875, Mississippi Democrats also used widespread intimidation to control local elections, which became known as the Mississippi Plan. Such violence was adopted by chapters in other cities and counties. Democrats regained control of Alabama and other state legislatures.



Nihil novum sub sole.

Back to the Beer Hall Putsch, it would be interesting to compare the sentences received by Hitler, Ludendorff and their gang with the sentences that the gang who conspired to kidnap Michigan's governor will receive.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on November 26, 2020, 12:33:11 AM
That was some underlining worthy of Reddit. Why not just join them and say "It was a Republican who freed the slaves!"?

Do you really, honestly, need to have it explained to you the changing face and philosophies of the Rs and Ds, the near reversal of roles,  from the late 19th century to the late 20th?


Vox:

How Republicans went from the party of Lincoln to the party of Trump, in 13 maps (https://www.vox.com/2016/7/20/12148750/republican-party-trump-lincoln)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on November 26, 2020, 03:48:32 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 25, 2020, 02:43:18 PM
     The Inside Story of Michigan's Fake Voter Fraud Scandal (https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/11/24/michigan-election-trump-voter-fraud-democracy-440475)

More than any policy enacted or court vacancy filled, Trump's legacy will be his unprecedented assault on the legitimacy of the ballot box. And it will not be considered in isolation. Future iterations of the GOP will make casual insinuations of voter fraud central to the party's brand. The next generation of Republicans will have learned how to sow doubts about election integrity in one breath and in the next breath bemoan the nation's lack of faith in our elections, creating a self-perpetuating justification to cast suspicion on a process that by raw numbers does not appear conducive to keeping them in power.

This is Trump's legacy:  undermining faith in the electoral process.  Even assuming Trump doesn't run himself in '23-'24 it is very likely the next Republican candidate will exploit the myth of election fraud.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on November 26, 2020, 04:00:50 AM
Quote from: milk on November 25, 2020, 05:31:59 AM
It's a bit of a straw man. I doubt most critics in this vein were saying this. I don't know, maybe I'm wrong. There were regulations put into place after Nixon and perhaps they need updating. Trump mixed his business with government to some degree, put his businesses into a practically meaningless blind trust, had government officials revolving through his admin in a whimsical way, he had inexperienced and unqualified family around him as advisors, etc. There's stuff like that that made people say, "oh, he's acting from the playbook of a tin-pot dictator." I agree that it's a lot more to do with his personality and that he was constrained by a system that mostly "works." Trum wanted to choose his electorate rather than the way it worked out according to the system: The electorate didn't choose him. However, by vomiting a constant stream of lies and bringing along a coterie of liars, he convinced millions of dummies that he only lost because of fraud. The republicans still want to pick their electorate by pushing the fraud narrative and they tried to influence the system to do it. Trump ginned up the conspiracy by getting his voters to vote in-person and repubs had those votes counted first. Trump was lying about how mail-ins were fraud votes months back in the hope of tarnishing the legitimacy of the process and altering the wishes of the electorate. It didn't work this time. Maybe it's all about fundraising and keeping an hysterical base of devotees to con, fund his legal battles or draw on to support a future run. No, he's not a fascist and he didn't turn the U.S. into the movie Bananas. He did act like that and it's a mystery whether he believes what comes out of his own mouth as it's clear his white house staff cannot possibly believe his nonsense.     

The fact is the Trump was an incompetent POTUS and not a very shrewd politician.  If a smarter and maybe even more cynical populist to were to gain the Presidency, one can only fear the consequences to American democracy.

Perhaps the biggest damage, IMO, is Trump's sowing doubt in the electoral process.  This is a thing that will be exploited by future candidates of the Republican Party and likely the Democratic Party as well.  Once people loose faith in election results, everything is on the table.

I'm not saying this is something Trump thought throw.  I tend to think he subconsciously anticipated his loss and, given his pathological narcissism, invented a means to deflect the reality of rejection and defeat.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 26, 2020, 04:01:22 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on November 26, 2020, 12:33:11 AM
Do you really, honestly, need to have it explained to you the changing face and philosophies of the Rs and Ds, the near reversal of roles,  from the late 19th century to the late 20th?

Both parties have changed their philosophies (insofar as such a lofty notion can be applied to sloganeering) but not their essentially cynical, hypocritical, unprincipled, power-hungry nature.

Quote
How Republicans went from the party of Lincoln to the party of Trump, in 13 maps (https://www.vox.com/2016/7/20/12148750/republican-party-trump-lincoln)

A History of the Democratic Party – From Slavery to Obama: Loyal Defenders of Capitalism (https://speakoutsocialists.org/a-history-of-the-democratic-party-from-slavery-to-obama-loyal-defenders-of-capitalism/)

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 26, 2020, 04:46:35 AM
Voter fraud has long been a go to talking point among Republicans and libertarians.

There has always been talk about inner city (= black) people voting multiple times, and this has always been regarded as a fact that Democrats would not see, because the D party profited from these non-existent shenanigans.

The ironic fact of this election is that the only voter fraud that has been noted has been isolated cases of Republicans that voted twice, either by accident or accidentally on purpose, or voted for their dead mom, because she would have wanted it that way.

This belonging to realm of facts does not make the slightest impression (also, quantitatively it doesn't mean a thing), whereas the myth of black inner city folk bringing thousands of non-existent votes to the D party bosses is indestructible. Trump tapped into this myth successfully and so will the next R candidate.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 26, 2020, 05:12:11 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 26, 2020, 12:03:51 AM
Searching for the USA equivalent(s) of the Beer Hall Putsch


You will find no analog.  Beer Hall Putsches are European.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Zeus on November 26, 2020, 07:07:39 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on November 25, 2020, 02:50:50 PM
And the failure and incompetence of the Beer Hall Putsch proves the robustness of the Weimar Republic and that this would-be dictator is just a clownish amusement and any newspaper that says otherwise is just peddling hysterical propaganda.

Hear! Hear!

Everything is for the best in the best of all possible countries.

Oh, and government is evil.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on November 26, 2020, 07:17:44 AM
Quote from: Herman on November 25, 2020, 11:17:36 PM
Has there ever been a lame duck session like this?

The pardons are obviously standard, but all these steps to make it harder for the next administration are rather new to me.

And this includes not just the billions Mnuchin is locking up so Biden / Yellen won't have any budget, but also the death row executions.

The basic strategy is to leave a mess, complain about whatever Biden does to fix, complain about him trying to fix it and by that method win back the House and full control of the Senate in 2022, and let the Trump-anointed candidate win the WH in 2024.
Add to that of course claims that Biden's election was rigged as extra motives for Real Americans to vote Republican.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 26, 2020, 07:39:44 AM
Quote from: JBS on November 26, 2020, 07:17:44 AM
The basic strategy is to leave a mess, complain about whatever Biden does to fix, complain about him trying to fix it and by that method win back the House and full control of the Senate in 2022, and let the Trump-anointed candidate win the WH in 2024.
Add to that of course claims that Biden's election was rigged as extra motives for Real Americans to vote Republican.

Yes, and keep saying that nothing that Trump c.s. did in 2016 - 2020 was really bad, since the USA clearly did not fall off a cliff. (Never mind hundreds of thousands of dead, just don't mention them. "We like the ones who did not die.")
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 26, 2020, 07:58:36 AM
NY Gov. Cuomo Says Supreme Court Decision Overturning COVID Restrictions for Religious Services Has 'No Practical Effect' (https://www.newsweek.com/ny-gov-cuomo-says-supreme-court-decision-overturning-covid-restrictions-religious-services-has-1550598)

Cuomo claims victory even in defeat.  The important thing here, of course, is that Roberts sided with the court's three liberals.  I suspect that will become more common.  Maybe Roberts can still become a Warren size disappointment.


Quote from: JBS on November 26, 2020, 07:17:44 AM
The basic strategy is to leave a mess, complain about whatever Biden does to fix, complain about him trying to fix it and by that method win back the House and full control of the Senate in 2022, and let the Trump-anointed candidate win the WH in 2024.
Add to that of course claims that Biden's election was rigged as extra motives for Real Americans to vote Republican.

Gotta keep your eyes on the prize.  A fully Republican controlled Congress for 2023-2025 would be outstanding.  The administration would be hemmed in.  Dems had best pray for victory in both Georgia elections and then ram through as much legislation as they can.  That may be wishful thinking for Dems.  Here's a heartwarming story: Majority say they want GOP in control of Senate: poll (https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/527159-majority-say-they-want-gop-in-control-of-senate-poll)

Quote from: Julia ManschesterFifty-six percent of voters said they want a divided government with Republicans in control of the upper chamber, according to data released exclusively to The Hill.

I rather assume that since voters are far dumber than internet board posters, this means nothing, and no doubt a Harvard CAPS-Harris poll cannot be taken seriously.  The republic is doomed, and so forth.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 26, 2020, 08:16:32 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 26, 2020, 07:58:36 AM


I rather assume that since voters are far dumber than internet board posters, this means nothing, and no doubt a Harvard CAPS-Harris poll cannot be taken seriously.  The republic is doomed, and so forth.

     What do dumb voters want? They want good stuff from the politicians they know, not the other side. There are smart voters, too, that have figured out who wants to do the thing and who wants to stop the thing being done.

     A common belief is that divided government leads to compromise which raises the odds that the good thing will get done. GMG Big Brains know better.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 26, 2020, 08:38:09 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on November 26, 2020, 03:48:32 AM
This is Trump's legacy:  undermining faith in the electoral process.  Even assuming Trump doesn't run himself in '23-'24 it is very likely the next Republican candidate will exploit the myth of election fraud.

     It will be interesting to see if any Repub contender for 2024 breaks ranks and acknowledges that elections are fairly run and free of fraud. As things stand that would be political suicide.

     Then there's the matter of infiltration by QAnon. Signs in the sky say this version of crowd madness is waning, perhaps heading for Satanic day care extinction. The GOP will be vulnerable to the next craze, though, given the importance of denialism on many fronts built into the party.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 26, 2020, 09:37:47 AM
     The Biden Presidency Already Has Its First Conspiracy Theory: The Great Reset (https://www.thedailybeast.com/joe-bidens-presidency-already-has-its-first-conspiracy-theory-the-great-reset?ref=home?ref=home)

"Now we have this push for what's being called the Great Reset," Newsmax host Michelle Malkin said on a Nov. 21 show. "And every aspect of the way that we live our lives, how we worship, whether we're allowed to, how we're raising our kids, how they're allowed to access education, is being transformed based on nothing that is actually supported by real science."

     In no way are we having this push other than the dingdongs who are pushing it. I don't get the reference to science and actual support by it. The scientists are supposed to be part of the plot.

     Also I note a distinct lack of sub-basement torture rooms and spaceships. To be fair, the inclusion of Sesame Street puppets is plusgood.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 26, 2020, 09:46:06 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 26, 2020, 09:37:47 AM
     The Biden Presidency Already Has Its First Conspiracy Theory: The Great Reset (https://www.thedailybeast.com/joe-bidens-presidency-already-has-its-first-conspiracy-theory-the-great-reset?ref=home?ref=home)

"Now we have this push for what's being called the Great Reset," Newsmax host Michelle Malkin said on a Nov. 21 show. "And every aspect of the way that we live our lives, how we worship, whether we're allowed to, how we're raising our kids, how they're allowed to access education, is being transformed based on nothing that is actually supported by real science."

     In no way are we having this push other than the dingdongs who are pushing it. I don't get the reference to science and actual support by it. The scientists are supposed to be part of the plot.

     Also I note a distinct lack of sub-basement torture rooms and spaceships. To be fair, the inclusion of Sesame Street puppets is plusgood.

I have been in online contact with a Canadian woman for over a decade. Now in the era of Trump she has started talking about weird things she never before did. She supports Trump and thinks Justin Trudeau is part of this "reset thing". She is anti-vaxxer. I try to talk sense to her, but... ...so the World is ruined. Half of people are insane and I don't what the fuck to do
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 26, 2020, 09:47:24 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 26, 2020, 09:46:06 AMShe supports Trump and thinks Justin Trudeau is part of this "reset thing".


Perhaps someone here can explain how any non-American can be a Trump supporter.  Or opponent, for that matter.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 26, 2020, 10:01:10 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 26, 2020, 09:47:24 AM

Perhaps someone here can explain how any non-American and be a Trump supporter.  Or opponent, for that matter.

There are Trumpists outside the US. In Finland about 20 % support Trump. Typically those who support nationalistic anti-immigrant right wing populist parties support also Trump. In Finland this party is True Finns (Perussuomalaiset in Finnish), the only party with more support for Trump than Biden. Laura Huhtasaari (https://finlandtoday.fi/finns-party-member-laura-huhtasaari-nominates-president-trump-for-2021-nobel-peace-prize/) of that party even nominated Trump for 2021 Nobel Peace Prize, something that makes me extremely embarassed of being a Finn!  :-X
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 26, 2020, 10:06:58 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 26, 2020, 09:47:24 AM

Perhaps someone here can explain how any non-American and be a Trump supporter.  Or opponent, for that matter.

     It's part of Reset theory. Soros will get it done.

Quote from: 71 dB on November 26, 2020, 10:01:10 AM
There are Trumpists outside the US.

     There are Communists everywhere.

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on November 26, 2020, 10:35:34 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 26, 2020, 09:47:24 AM

Perhaps someone here can explain how any non-American and be a Trump supporter.  Or opponent, for that matter.

You ask?  Really?  As the wealthiest, most powerful, and as yet, still the most influential nation in the world you wonder why a non-American would be concerned about an incompetent loose-cannon in the White House.  Presumably you're joking rather making light of the matter.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 26, 2020, 10:41:19 AM
The weirder thing is why non-Americans would support (or want to support) Trump. However in most nation their are men and women who are attracted to this style of behaviour. (I was going to say 'politics'.

In many western countries Trump would get ten or fifteen percent of the vote, is my guess, without even showing up.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 26, 2020, 10:50:08 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on November 26, 2020, 10:35:34 AM
You ask?  Really?  As the wealthiest, most powerful, and as yet, still the most influential nation in the world you wonder why a non-American would be concerned about an incompetent loose-cannon in the White House.  Presumably you're joking rather making light of the matter.

Yes, I ask.  Really.  What is a non-American Trump "supporter"?  What does that mean?  Does it mean they are fans, or something similar?  Non-Americans cannot support American politicians in any real-world way (money, campaigning, voting, etc).  Moral support is worthless.  Just as worthless as moral opposition.

At some point, one would think non-Americans would conclude that their dependence on the US in security and financial matters is a risk and would take action to change course.  But instead, if the President-elect is correct, and "America is Back"  - a phrase as intrinsically worthless as "America First" or "Make America Great Again" - and all manner of foreign leaders are more than happy to return to a variant of the status quo ante, then non-Americans haven't learned a thing. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 26, 2020, 11:06:04 AM

     Risk balancing is done everywhere. Trump altered the balance and Biden will, too. Everyone learns, unlearns and relearns. I don't think Biden will or even can return to the status quo ante. I would want him to support the alliances in ways most consistent with the nature of opposing forces in Asia and Europe as they presently exist. We won't get Obama foreign policy laxness. Iran policy will change. Russia policy will be more realistic. China policy will focus more on results and less on frenemy theater Trump displayed. Biden will be low on the warmonger scale.

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 26, 2020, 11:25:02 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 26, 2020, 11:06:04 AM
     I would want him to support the alliances in ways most consistent with the nature of opposing forces in Asia and Europe as they presently exist.

What forces oppose the USA, or NATO, in Europe?

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 26, 2020, 11:30:48 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 26, 2020, 11:25:02 AM
What forces oppose the USA, or NATO, in Europe?

Russia!  You know, the baddest of the bad.  The evil empire, or its remnants, at any rate, currently headed by a cunning, ruthless leader of such evil genius that he is slowly rebuilding the Soviet or Tsarist Empire (I can't remember which) with no opposition or even meaningful discussion. 

Asia is filled with non-Westerners, and therefore is much more prone to non-Western modes of thought, which are bad, of course, so therefore, 'Murica!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 26, 2020, 12:09:45 PM

     
Quote from: Florestan on November 26, 2020, 11:25:02 AM
What forces oppose the USA, or NATO, in Europe?



     Russian policy has been consistent under Putin. I don't see that changing. It would be better to have a policy of cooperation among the NATO countries. I think we're done with undermining such cooperation for now. In Asia our allies are worried about an increasingly aggressive China. While Americans might have unique ideas about what constitutes opposition, mostly it's not specific to them. I think Asians and Europeans have their own quite similar ideas. We aren't implanting our ideas in their heads. We are not that exceptional.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 26, 2020, 12:15:07 PM
Quote from: Todd on November 26, 2020, 11:30:48 AM
Russia!  You know, the baddest of the bad.  The evil empire, or its remnants, at any rate, currently headed by a cunning, ruthless leader of such evil genius that he is slowly rebuilding the Soviet or Tsarist Empire (I can't remember which) with no opposition or even meaningful discussion. 

;D  ;D ;D

And lo and behold:

Quote from: drogulus on November 26, 2020, 12:09:45 PM
      Russian policy has been consistent under Putin.

When I hear Europe I tend to think EU.  Are there forces within EU that oppose USA and NATO?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 26, 2020, 12:33:55 PM
Quote from: Florestan on November 26, 2020, 12:15:07 PM
;D  ;D ;D

And lo and behold:

When I hear Europe I tend to think EU.  Are there forces within EU that oppose USA and NATO?

     What's the Romanian view of NATO and the opposition? I don't want to implant 'Murican ideas, so tell me what Romanians think about NATO missiles there. Why don't you protest that opposition is a fiction promoted by US warmongers? You know best what the situation is. It's your damn country, after all. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/tongue.gif)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 26, 2020, 12:39:12 PM
Quote from: drogulus on November 26, 2020, 12:33:55 PM
     What's the Romanian view of NATO and the opposition? I don't want to implant 'Murican ideas, so tell me what Romanians think about NATO missiles there.

Romania is one of the staunchest supporters and allies of the USA, regardless of who is POTUS at any given time, and sees NATO as crucial to her security. NATO missiles are more than welcome. There is virtually no opposition to USA and NATO.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 26, 2020, 12:44:25 PM
Quote from: Florestan on November 26, 2020, 12:39:12 PM
Romania is one of the staunchest supporters and allies of the USA, regardless of who is POTUS at any given time, and sees NATO as crucial to her security. NATO missiles are more than welcome. There is virtually no opposition to USA and NATO.

     After exhaustive research over minutes I think what you say is true. That implicitly answers the opposition (pseudo) question, does it not?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 26, 2020, 12:50:05 PM
Quote from: drogulus on November 26, 2020, 12:44:25 PM
     After exhaustive research over minutes I think what you say is true. That implicitly answers the opposition (pseudo) question, does it not?

Once again: when I hear about Europe, the first thing that comes to my mind is not Russia but EU. I really don't need to be lectured about what Russia means in terms of geopolitics and security threats.

My question still stands unanswered: are there forces within EU opposed to USA and NATO? I know the answer. Do you?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 26, 2020, 01:10:20 PM
Quote from: Florestan on November 26, 2020, 12:50:05 PM
Once again: when I hear about Europe, the first thing that comes to my mind is not Russia but EU. I really don't need to be lectured about what Russia means in terms of geopolitics and security threats.

My question still stands unanswered: are there forces within EU opposed to USA and NATO? I know the answer. Do you?

     Excellent, I didn't think you needed a lecture on Russia so I didn't bother. That was my point. We don't have to impose US ideas and it would be foolish to try.

     The EU is more opaque to US based Big Brains than NATO. Trumpist hostility to the EU as playing the US for suckers on trade has been in the news. As for EU members opposing NATO I would like to know more. Regardless of what the French and Germans say about "go it alone" I don't think they really want to do that. It's a reaction to Trumpist hostility, though I think it has dawned on them that they need to be more self reliant.

     Oh, it just occurred to me that you might be referring to Poland and Hungary.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 26, 2020, 11:34:31 PM
Quote from: drogulus on November 26, 2020, 01:10:20 PM
     As for EU members opposing NATO I would like to know more. Regardless of what the French and Germans say about "go it alone" I don't think they really want to do that. It's a reaction to Trumpist hostility, though I think it has dawned on them that they need to be more self reliant.

     Oh, it just occurred to me that you might be referring to Poland and Hungary.

Poland is as staunchly pro-USA and pro-NATO as Romania. DItto the Baltic States. Hungary has moved towards Russia in the last years (for economic reasons) but Orban always stress that his country is part and parcel of NATO and EU.

The answer is this: while the degree of approval varies from country to country, there is no EU member state which opposes USA and NATO. However there are political parties that do that. The most nationally significant of them is the Rassemblement National in France. Incidentally, they have strong ties with Putin.

The talks about a unified European military are as empty as it gets. There is simply no alternative to NATO and neither the EU nor the USA can afford a lets-see-what-happens-if approach.

Otoh, there is another European country which poses a problem, though not yet a threat, to NATO: Turkey, whose relationships with the USA have been constantly deteriorating ever since Erdogan was elected and re-elected President.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 27, 2020, 12:29:06 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 26, 2020, 11:34:31 PM


Otoh, there is another European country which poses a problem, though not yet a threat, to NATO: Turkey, whose relationships with the USA have been constantly deteriorating ever since Erdogan was elected and re-elected President.

Erdogan and Trump got along like a house on fire.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 27, 2020, 04:51:18 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 26, 2020, 11:34:31 PMThe talks about a unified European military are as empty as it gets.

Empty and funny.


Quote from: Florestan on November 26, 2020, 11:34:31 PMThere is simply no alternative to NATO and neither the EU nor the USA can afford a lets-see-what-happens-if approach.

This is not true.  The US did not have to establish NATO in the first place, despite the standard post-war narrative.  The enlargement of NATO starting in 1999 is a long-term strategic blunder.  It is completely unnecessary.  It does nothing at all to enhance American security.  It makes the US less secure by expanding commitments to countries that have no strategic value, or economic value, to the US.  The beneficiaries are small, weak countries that understandably seek US protection.  For instance, what, pray tell, does North Macedonia offer the US?  Nothing.  Nothing at all.  Preferably, NATO should be returned to its 1991 boundaries.  If that is not possible, it should be dissolved.  Obviously, the destruction of the EU should be pursued whether or not NATO remains.  A splintered, destabilized Europe is preferable from a long-term strategic perspective.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 27, 2020, 05:04:10 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 27, 2020, 04:51:18 AM
Preferably, NATO should be returned to its 1991 boundaries.  If that is not possible, it should be dissolved.  Obviously, the destruction of the EU should be pursued whether or not NATO remains.  A splintered, destabilized Europe is preferable from a long-term strategic perspective.

This is probably the only issue(s) on which your views and mine are irreconcilable, which is fine with me.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 27, 2020, 05:26:30 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 27, 2020, 05:04:10 AM
This is probably the only issue(s) on which your views and mine are irreconcilable, which is fine with me.


Considering the mighty North Macedonia only became a member of NATO this year, while the dastardly Trump was president, the man bent on all manner of perfidious deeds designed to help Russia as payback for successful collusion in the 2016 election, US dedication to NATO does not seem particularly strained at the present time.  I'm not sure how North Macedonia may be able to assist if there is a crisis in the Strait of Malacca, though.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 27, 2020, 05:35:42 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 27, 2020, 05:26:30 AM

Considering the mighty North Macedonia only became a member of NATO this year, while the dastardly Trump was president, the man bent on all manner of perfidious deeds designed to help Russia as payback for successful collusion in the 2016 election, US dedication to NATO does not seem particularly strained at the present time.

That's what I've been maintaining all along: for all his harsh rhetoric, Trump did nothing to weaken NATO, or USA's committment to it --- and I'm not even sure he wanted to do anything.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 27, 2020, 05:38:22 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 27, 2020, 05:35:42 AM
That's what I've been maintaining all along: for all his harsh rhetoric, Trump did nothing to weaken NATO, or USA's committment to it --- and I'm not even sure he wanted to do anything.


The press and anti-Trump zealots got very excited about his refusal to offer vocal support for Article 5 of the NATO charter, almost as though the president is beholden to it as though it were part of the US Constitution.  Because, Russia.  Or something.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on November 27, 2020, 06:58:10 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 26, 2020, 10:50:08 AM
Yes, I ask.  Really.  What is a non-American Trump "supporter"?  What does that mean?  Does it mean they are fans, or something similar?  Non-Americans cannot support American politicians in any real-world way (money, campaigning, voting, etc).  Moral support is worthless.  Just as worthless as moral opposition.

At some point, one would think non-Americans would conclude that their dependence on the US in security and financial matters is a risk and would take action to change course.  But instead, if the President-elect is correct, and "America is Back"  - a phrase as intrinsically worthless as "America First" or "Make America Great Again" - and all manner of foreign leaders are more than happy to return to a variant of the status quo ante, then non-Americans haven't learned a thing.

I guess one might say that a non-American Trump supporter is one who comes to a forums such as this, with Americans as well as others, and advocates for Donald Trump.  A non-American Trump opponent, such as me, would be one who comes here to advocated against Trump whether on international or -- for that matter -- domestic US issues.

If Trump's "Make American Great Again" means, as it seems to in many cases, given the international community the middle finger, then it isn't hard to imagine why foreign leads would welcome the former status quo.  Just a personal opinion of course, but neglecting much less abuse allies doesn't seem to be an enlightened strategy even for the USA.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 27, 2020, 06:59:39 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 26, 2020, 11:34:31 PM
Poland is as staunchly pro-USA and pro-NATO as Romania. DItto the Baltic States. Hungary has moved towards Russia in the last years (for economic reasons) but Orban always stress that his country is part and parcel of NATO and EU.

The answer is this: while the degree of approval varies from country to country, there is no EU member state which opposes USA and NATO. However there are political parties that do that. The most nationally significant of them is the Rassemblement National in France. Incidentally, they have strong ties with Putin.

The talks about a unified European military are as empty as it gets. There is simply no alternative to NATO and neither the EU nor the USA can afford a lets-see-what-happens-if approach.

Otoh, there is another European country which poses a problem, though not yet a threat, to NATO: Turkey, whose relationships with the USA have been constantly deteriorating ever since Erdogan was elected and re-elected President.

     Sounds good to me. An American foreign policy bot would say pretty much the same thing.

Quote from: Florestan on November 27, 2020, 05:35:42 AM
That's what I've been maintaining all along: for all his harsh rhetoric, Trump did nothing to weaken NATO, or USA's committment to it --- and I'm not even sure he wanted to do anything.



     He failed because the state is too deep to crumple, and TrumPutinist policy is not US policy, and Trump has no coherent anti-vision to replace vision.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 27, 2020, 07:08:19 AM

     (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Enz_9RPUYAEh5yW?format=jpg&name=small)

     (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/smiley.gif)
     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on November 27, 2020, 07:21:51 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 26, 2020, 10:50:08 AM
Non-Americans cannot [legally] support American politicians in any real-world way (money, campaigning, voting, etc). 

Note the amendment ^ ^ ^. Of course they can. it's easy if those Americans own businesses with foreign customers. Want to put money in Trump's pocket? Simple as booking unused rooms in Trump International Hotel (ghost booking). Or through real estate transactions. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 27, 2020, 07:25:44 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on November 27, 2020, 06:58:10 AMI guess one might say that a non-American Trump supporter is one who comes to a forums such as this, with Americans as well as others, and advocates for Donald Trump.  A non-American Trump opponent, such as me, would be one who comes here to advocated against Trump whether on international or -- for that matter -- domestic US issues.

Support from non-Americans means nothing.  Opposition from non-Americans means nothing.


Quote from: Fëanor on November 27, 2020, 06:58:10 AMIf Trump's "Make American Great Again" means, as it seems to in many cases, given the international community the middle finger, then it isn't hard to imagine why foreign leads would welcome the former status quo.

You obviously missed the point.  Rational world leaders should be looking for an alternative to the status quo ante.  But for the most part, they are not.  China and Russia, for very different reasons, are, though it will take until at least the 2030s to see if their efforts pay off.


Quote from: BasilValentine on November 27, 2020, 07:21:51 AMNote the amendment ^ ^ ^. Of course they can. it's easy if those Americans own businesses with foreign customers. Want to put money in Trump's pocket? Simple as booking unused rooms in Trump International Hotel (ghost booking). Or through real estate transactions.

Ah, yes, the Trump self-enrichment line of reasoning.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 27, 2020, 08:10:10 AM
     The US can affect changes in the status quo in a cooperative manner. It's rational to do it that way. We don't need Trumpy Tantrum Time to continue. European geniuses will probably agree.

     If rational European leaders think NATO should be maintained, I don't see a downside. It will change. Russia will continue to drink itself to death and be dangerous until it does. It suffers the curse of resource dependence, and it doesn't exactly help that poison energy is declining.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on November 27, 2020, 09:34:06 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 27, 2020, 07:25:44 AM
Quote from: Feanor
I guess one might say that a non-American Trump supporter is one who comes to a forums such as this, with Americans as well as others, and advocates for Donald Trump.  A non-American Trump opponent, such as me, would be one who comes here to advocated against Trump whether on international or -- for that matter -- domestic US issues.

Support from non-Americans means nothing.  Opposition from non-Americans means nothing.

None are so deaf as refuse to listen.

Quote from: Todd on November 27, 2020, 07:25:44 AM
Quote from: Feanor
If Trump's "Make American Great Again" means, as it seems to in many cases, given the international community the middle finger, then it isn't hard to imagine why foreign leads would welcome the former status quo.  Just a personal opinion of course, but neglecting much less abuse allies doesn't seem to be an enlightened strategy even for the USA.

You obviously missed the point.  Rational world leaders should be looking for an alternative to the status quo ante.  But for the most part, they are not.  China and Russia, for very different reasons, are, though it will take until at least the 2030s to see if their efforts pay off.

I not sure that world leader are so oblivious to the evolving situation as you imply.  However Trump ought to have tried persuading rather than demeaning, bullying, and threatening.  Demeaning, bullying, and threatening isn't necessarily the best way to approach adversaries much less friends and allies.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on November 27, 2020, 09:39:20 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 27, 2020, 07:25:44 AM
Ah, yes, the Trump self-enrichment line of reasoning.

It's not a "line of reasoning." It's a direct refutation of your naive claim that "Non-Americans cannot support American politicians in any real-world way." Obviously, they can.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 27, 2020, 09:40:38 AM
     
Quote from: Fëanor on November 27, 2020, 09:34:06 AM


I not sure that world leader are so oblivious to the evolving situation as you imply.  However Trump ought to have tried persuading rather than demeaning, bullying, and threatening.  Demeaning, bullying, and threatening isn't necessarily the best way to approach adversaries much less friends and allies.

     Trump had no rational alternative to offer. Neither do anti-anti-Trumpsters. They mean nothing.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 27, 2020, 09:53:27 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on November 27, 2020, 09:34:06 AM
Support from non-Americans means nothing.  Opposition from non-Americans means nothing.

None are so deaf as refuse to listen.

I should like to see some academic research that points to the impact international opinion has on voting in the US.  I know a good number of non-Americans want to believe that their opinions really matter, but that does not make it so.  There is no reason at all to pay attention to what, say, Swedes think about American politics.  The internet and the ability of everyone from everywhere to opine on everything does not translate into effectual opinions and influence.

Support from non-Americans means nothing.  Opposition from non-Americans means nothing.


Quote from: Fëanor on November 27, 2020, 09:34:06 AM
You obviously missed the point.  Rational world leaders should be looking for an alternative to the status quo ante.  But for the most part, they are not.  China and Russia, for very different reasons, are, though it will take until at least the 2030s to see if their efforts pay off.

I not sure that world leader are so oblivious to the evolving situation as you imply.  However Trump ought to have tried persuading rather than demeaning, bullying, and threatening.  Demeaning, bullying, and threatening isn't necessarily the best way to approach adversaries much less friends and allies.

Demeaning and threatening - the word "bullying" means pretty much nothing generally, and absolutely nothing in the realm of international relations - are effective tools, though they should be used more judiciously than how Trump often used them.  The tactics should be used on friend and foe alike, depending on the objective and situation.  Sometimes, like when Trump strong-armed Canada in signing a new trade agreement, demeaning and threatening can be very useful, indeed.  (To be sure, that was politically beneficial.)

I have no doubt that even modestly effective world leaders are aware of the evolving state of world affairs, yet no national leaders currently covered by US security agreements have taken effective steps to break away from US security guarantees (small, weak countries are security consumers, not security producers, so that's easy to explain), and steps taken to reduce the central role of the dollar and US Treasuries as the backbone of the international financial system have not even been strong enough to be called feeble.  Small, weak nations are dependent on the US.  It's quite embarrassing for said nations, really.


Quote from: BasilValentine on November 27, 2020, 09:39:20 AM
It's not a "line of reasoning." It's a direct refutation of your naive claim that "Non-Americans cannot support American politicians in any real-world way." Obviously, they can.

Or not.  Let's go with not.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on November 27, 2020, 10:02:04 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on November 27, 2020, 07:21:51 AM
Note the amendment ^ ^ ^. Of course they can. it's easy if those Americans own businesses with foreign customers. Want to put money in Trump's pocket? Simple as booking unused rooms in Trump International Hotel (ghost booking). Or through real estate transactions.

As a side remark, lots of European youngsters, including Danes, travel to US presidential campaigns, and directly assist in campaigns over there, typically for the democrats. A good deal of them will traditionally be interviewed by the media here. Their work includes phone calls and visiting potential voters. For campaigning.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 27, 2020, 10:11:17 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on November 27, 2020, 10:02:04 AM
As a side remark, lots of European youngsters, including Danes, travel to US presidential campaigns, and directly assist in campaigns over there, typically for the democrats. A good deal of them will traditionally be interviewed by the media here. Their work includes phone calls and visiting potential voters. For campaigning.


What is "lots"?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 27, 2020, 10:11:42 AM
     Should Donald Trump be prosecuted? Proceed with caution. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/should-donald-trump-be-prosecuted-proceed-with-caution/2020/11/25/3274900a-2f4d-11eb-96c2-aac3f162215d_story.html)

Prosecuting Trump may well be justified, but the consequences of further inflaming an already divided country ought to be sobering. A decision this momentous needs to be made on the merits and kept as far from politics as possible.

     I don't think it's at all likely that the new administration would look favorably on reckless prosecution. It isn't going to work like that. Adam Schiff won't be AG. It might be Sally Yates, a pick which would be very Bidenesque, a former deputy AG that could detoxify the department.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 27, 2020, 10:25:16 AM

     It really depends on how much foreign policy affects your vote. If you care about foreign relations then foreign opinion will matter, though indirectly. If you don't consider the US position in the world as a voting factor, you probably won't be interested in what people in other countries think.

     For me it's a matter of satisfying my own curiosity and preoccupation with history as a means of evaluating the present and probabilities for the future. "Means nothing" means nothing to me.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 27, 2020, 10:41:29 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 27, 2020, 09:53:27 AM

I have no doubt that even modestly effective world leaders are aware of the evolving state of world affairs, yet no national leaders currently covered by US security agreements have taken effective steps to break away from US security guarantees (small, weak countries are security consumers, not security producers, so that's easy to explain), and steps taken to reduce the central role of the dollar and US Treasuries as the backbone of the international financial system have not even been strong enough to be called feeble.


     Yes, they are making rational choices. There's no need to yammer about alternatives that are less rational than what they do now. If they start to demonstrate they are suffering from the terrible oppression of the Yankee dollar, we'll know. The Trumpist view was that dastardly foreigners were taking advantage of us!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 27, 2020, 12:13:38 PM
Quote from: MusicTurner on November 27, 2020, 10:02:04 AM
As a side remark, lots of European youngsters, including Danes, travel to US presidential campaigns, and directly assist in campaigns over there, typically for the democrats. A good deal of them will traditionally be interviewed by the media here. Their work includes phone calls and visiting potential voters. For campaigning.

Some, too, in more strategic spots, if it so happens that they have political experience.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on November 27, 2020, 01:33:40 PM
Quote from: Herman on November 27, 2020, 12:13:38 PM
Some, too, in more strategic spots, if it so happens that they have political experience.

Yes, they might even participate in planning etc.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on November 27, 2020, 02:22:20 PM
The article doesn't address it, but this time it would be treason, wouldn't it? If national secrets leave the blabbing unthinking mouth of Citizen Trump he would no longer have the protection from the law he's recently enjoyed in blabbing secrets?:


When he leaves office, can ex-President Trump be trusted with America's national security secrets?
Ex-presidents are entitled to classified briefings. Some ex-intel officials think Trump shouldn't get access to any national secrets when he leaves office. (https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/when-he-leaves-office-can-ex-president-trump-be-trusted-n1248994)

[...]"Goldsmith and other experts noted that Trump has a history of carelessly revealing classified information. He told the Russian foreign minister and ambassador in 2017 about extremely sensitive terrorism threat information the U.S. had received from an ally. Last year he tweeted what experts said was a secret satellite photo of an Iranian nuclear installation.

The president also may be vulnerable to foreign influence. His tax records, as reported by The New York Times, reveal that Trump appears to face financial challenges, having personally guaranteed more than $400 million of his companies' debt at a time when the pandemic has put pressure on the hotel industry, in which Trump is a major player.

[...]That said, Trump probably is not conversant with many highly classified details, experts say, He was famous for paying only intermittent attention during his intelligence briefings and declining to read his written materials. Moreover, intelligence officials tend not to share specifics about sources and methods with any president, unless he asks.

So Trump probably doesn't know the names of the CIA's spies in Russia, experts say. But presumably he knows a bit about the capabilities of American surveillance drones, for example, or how adept the National Security Agency has been at intercepting the communications of various foreign governments.

Like so much with Trump, his track record of sharing secrets has been unprecedented in American presidential history.

In interviews with the journalist Bob Woodward for a book released this fall, Trump boasted about a secret nuclear weapons system that neither Russia nor China knew about.

According to The Washington Post, Woodward's sources "later confirmed that the U.S. military had a secret new weapons system, but they would not provide details, and that the people were surprised Trump had disclosed it."

When Trump briefed the public about the commando raid that killed ISIS leader Abu Bakr al Baghdadi, he disclosed classified and sensitive details, according to reporting by NBC News.

In 2017, Trump gave the location of two American nuclear submarines near North Korea to the president of the Philippines.

That same year, a member of his golf club at Mar-a-Lago took a photo of a briefing Trump and the Japanese prime minister were receiving in a public area about North Korea, and posted it on Facebook.

In 2018, The New York Times reported that Trump commonly used insecure cellphones to call friends, and that Chinese and other spies listened in, gaining valuable insights.

Doug Wise, a former CIA officer and Trump critic, argued this week in a piece on the Just Security web site that Trump has long posed a national security danger, and that affording him access to secrets after he leaves the White House would compound that danger.

Trump's large debts, he wrote, present "obvious and alarming counterintelligence risks" to the United States.

Russian President Vladimir Putin, for one, would have a great incentive to pay Trump to act on Russia's behalf, Wise wrote.

"Assuming President Joe Biden follows custom, Trump would continue to have access to sensitive information that the Russians would consider valuable," he wrote. "As horrifying as it would seem, could a financially leveraged former president be pressured or blackmailed into providing Moscow sensitive information in exchange for financial relief and future Russian business considerations?"

It was not impossible to envision Trump paid millions on retainer by Gulf Arab states or other foreign governments, Harvard professor Goldsmith said, "in the course of which he starts blabbing and disclosing lots of secrets. It wouldn't be an express quid pro quo, but people would pay for access to and time with him, knowing that he will not be discreet."

Former CIA Director John Brennan, a frequent Trump critic who was denied access to his own classified file by the president, said the Biden administration should carefully weigh the question of Trump's access to future secrets.

"The new administration would be well advised to conduct an immediate review to determine whether Donald Trump should have continued access to classified information in light of his past actions and deep concern about what he might do in the future," he said.

Then again, it may never become an issue, said former CIA officer Marc Polymeropoulos, who pointed out that Trump has long displayed "disdain" for American intelligence agencies.

"I would frankly be surprised if he even wanted these briefings," Polymeropoulos said."


Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 27, 2020, 02:30:19 PM

     We should let him keep the tiny desk.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on November 27, 2020, 02:31:18 PM
Quote from: drogulus on November 27, 2020, 07:08:19 AM
     (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Enz_9RPUYAEh5yW?format=jpg&name=small)

       

Wow. Even after everything I thought at first that that must be The Onion.

So that's in the Oval Office, right? Why have they removed the carpet and the furniture? Especially if Trump is still claiming he won?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on November 27, 2020, 02:50:58 PM
Quote from: Todd on November 26, 2020, 10:50:08 AM
Yes, I ask.  Really.  What is a non-American Trump "supporter"?  What does that mean?  Does it mean they are fans, or something similar?  Non-Americans cannot support American politicians in any real-world way (money, campaigning, voting, etc).  Moral support is worthless.  Just as worthless as moral opposition.

Non-Americans have been asked in polls (yes, we have polls outside the US!):

Which one of Trump and Biden do you want to win the election?

Some people answered Biden. Some other people answered Trump. Some people answered they don't have an opinion. That's how you get supporters for Biden and Trump among people who couldn't vote for them.

Moral support is worthless, you are correct about that, but it is support nevertheless. Support is often worthless. For example 2/3 of Americans support medicare for all. Doesn't mean it's happening anytime soon. So, it is worthless support. There is no vote on medicare for all this 2/3 majority of Americans could win just as I as an non-American could not vote for Biden or Trump. Regular Americans supporting a healthcare system is worthless, because the US is an oligarchy where the insurance companies and Big Pharma dictate the healthcare system almost completely.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on November 27, 2020, 04:38:00 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on November 27, 2020, 02:31:18 PM
Wow. Even after everything I thought at first that that must be The Onion.

So that's in the Oval Office, right? Why have they removed the carpet and the furniture? Especially if Trump is still claiming he won?

It's not the Oval Office, although I'm not sure which room it's in.  And I've just realized that "Google Lens" is much less useful than the old Image Search function.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on November 27, 2020, 06:17:57 PM
Two tweets, one showing the room as it was under Obama, the other showing President Bush Sr using the desk for an outdoor signing ceremony.

https://mobile.twitter.com/snowmanomics/status/1332364059061182467

https://mobile.twitter.com/YAppelbaum/status/1332343700198920193

QuoteIf the second photo seems grotesque, it isn't because of the desk.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on November 27, 2020, 06:58:02 PM
Ah...the Diplomatic Reception Room.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 27, 2020, 11:42:00 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on November 27, 2020, 02:22:20 PM
The article doesn't address it, but this time it would be treason, wouldn't it? If national secrets leave the blabbing unthinking mouth of Citizen Trump he would no longer have the protection from the law he's recently enjoyed in blabbing secrets?:



In 2017, Trump gave the location of two American nuclear submarines near North Korea to the president of the Philippines.


Russian President Vladimir Putin, for one, would have a great incentive to pay Trump to act on Russia's behalf, Wise wrote.



Oh, but Putin would not have to pay a dime. The art of Trump's deal is he's giving away his secrets for free, because he wants to impress these people. He's so easy to play it's ridiculous. He's a six year old, and he should definitely take this tiny desk home, in January.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 28, 2020, 12:00:26 AM
The Trump campaign paid three million dollars for a recount in two Wisconsin counties. As a result Biden got a few votes further ahead.

As in Michigan there are reports of Republica observers harrassing the volunteers doing the recount. It seems these people have not taken the trouble to familiarize themselves with the rules and regulations; they are just there to slow things down and make life miserable for the people doing the actual work. There was this guy in Michigan who said he didn't care about the law; he just did what the R party had told him.

"Election officials in Wisconsin complained earlier this week that observers representing the Trump campaign were obstructing the recount.

Observers broke the rules by constantly interrupting vote counters with questions and comments, complained Milwaukee County Clerk George Christenson. According to election officials, a Trump observer objected to every ballot that tabulators pulled from a bag to count simply because they were folded."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 28, 2020, 05:57:24 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on November 27, 2020, 02:50:58 PM
Non-Americans have been asked in polls (yes, we have polls outside the US!):


Yes, and they mean nothing.  When I see foreign poll results, I remember how John Kerry was preferred by 90%+ of Norwegians in 2004.  Remember, when it comes to the presidency of the US, the US has 538 Electoral Votes.  The rest of the world combined has 0. 

I may do some web sleuthing to see if any psychologists or psychiatrists have conducted research on why people fixate on politics in countries other than their own given that their fixation is intrinsically meaningless.  There must be some explanations for such irrational behavior.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 28, 2020, 06:05:39 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 28, 2020, 05:57:24 AM

Yes, and they mean nothing.  When I see foreign poll results, I remember how John Kerry was preferred by 90%+ of Norwegians in 2004.  Remember, when it comes to the presidency of the US, the US has 538 Electoral Votes.  The rest of the world combined has 0. 

I may do some web sleuthing to see if any psychologists or psychiatrists have conducted research on why people fixate on politics in countries other than their own given that their fixation is intrinsically meaningless.  There must be some explanations for such irrational behavior.

     There's nothing mental about having an interest in the politics of other countries, even tiny shithole countries. I think you are being a little disingenuous here, since you have "means nothing" interests just like normal people do.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 28, 2020, 06:23:39 AM
2021 will have some national political highlights.  Like this: Republicans ready to become deficit hawks again under a President Biden (https://thehill.com/homenews/news/527197-republicans-ready-to-become-deficit-hawks-again-under-a-president-biden)

The phrases "debt ceiling" and "debt crisis" appear in the article.  Oh yeah!

And then there's this: Biden's Cabinet a battleground for future GOP White House hopefuls (https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/527654-bidens-cabinet-a-battleground-for-future-gop-white-house-hopefuls)

I'm mostly interested in seeing how Tommy capitalizes on appointment battles.  I admit that I like Little Marco's line that Biden's national security picks are "polite & orderly caretakers of America's decline", but I'm not convinced he will be able to follow that up with anything substantive in terms of building broader support.  He really needs to flesh out his vision of economic nationalism to gain traction.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on November 28, 2020, 06:54:29 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 28, 2020, 05:57:24 AM

Yes, and they mean nothing.  When I see foreign poll results, I remember how John Kerry was preferred by 90%+ of Norwegians in 2004.  Remember, when it comes to the presidency of the US, the US has 538 Electoral Votes.  The rest of the world combined has 0. 

I may do some web sleuthing to see if any psychologists or psychiatrists have conducted research on why people fixate on politics in countries other than their own given that their fixation is intrinsically meaningless.  There must be some explanations for such irrational behavior.

So probably foreign polls and foreign opinion mean nothing when it comes to who gets elected.  I've known arrogant Americans who considered adverse foreign opinion of their favorite candidate to be a good thing, and the more reason to vote for them.  Point conceded.  8)

As for why foreigners care about elections in foreign countries, it's clear:  they and their countries are affected by the results -- and in no case more so than when the country is the USA.

When "Make America Great Again" means greatness only in the eyes of Americans while everywhere else the USA is increasingly despised, then the "greatness" is a narcissistic self-delusion.  (Trump know a lot about narcissistic self-delusion as do his staunch supporters.)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 28, 2020, 07:03:55 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on November 28, 2020, 06:54:29 AMAs for why foreigners care about elections in foreign countries, it's clear:  they and their countries are affected by the results -- and in no case more so than when the country is the USA.

Of course small, weak countries are affected by electoral outcomes in the US.  That doesn't make fixating on the internal politics of another country rational behavior.  Not at all.


Quote from: Fëanor on November 28, 2020, 06:54:29 AMWhen "Make America Great Again" means greatness only in the eyes of Americans while everywhere else the USA is increasingly despised, then the "greatness" is a narcissistic self-delusion.

Meh.  The US has been despised for decades.  Longer, even.  The mighty empires of Europe, for instance, were left aghast when the upstart US could summon tens of millions of dollars on a whim to wage war on Spain in 1898.  And despite being "despised", small, weak countries still clamor for protection from the US, and access to US capital markets.  Small, weak countries just can't get enough of US guns and money.  Some small, weak countries - Canada and Mexico come to mind - will never be able to break away from the US, as their entire economic structure is so reliant upon the North American colossus.

Again, most non-American leaders have every opportunity to break away from the existing international order, yet aside from bad guy countries, all they do is complain.  Maybe 2021 is the year things change.  Let's see. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 28, 2020, 07:17:10 AM
     
Quote from: Fëanor on November 28, 2020, 06:54:29 AM
So probably foreign polls and foreign opinion mean nothing when it comes to who gets elected.

     Rest assured, it doesn't. It's more like who gets elected has an effect on foreign polls and opinion.

     Foreign governments are probably in a holding pattern on the Trumpeo Stupid America regime. Accelerated decline understandably makes them nervous. If decline must happen, it should be professionally done. Even Little Marco knows this when he's not doing infotainment blurbs.

     One can sample Finnish opinion in a Big Brainy way without fixating overmuch. Also, one can discuss! Is this not the Diner? Are we not Big of Brain?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 28, 2020, 07:29:41 AM
Another feel good story from the failing New York Times: How Democrats Suffered Crushing Down-Ballot Losses Across America (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/28/us/politics/democrats-republicans-state-legislatures.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage)

Quote from: Trip GabrielThis year, Democrats targeted a dozen state legislative chambers where Republicans held tenuous majorities, including in Pennsylvania, Texas, Arizona, North Carolina and Minnesota. Their goal was to check the power of Republicans to redraw congressional and legislative districts in 2021, and to curb the rightward drift of policies from abortion to gun safety to voting rights.

But in all cases, Democrats came up short. None of their targeted legislative chambers flipped, even though Mr. Biden carried many of the districts that down-ballot Democrats did not. It could make it harder for Democrats to retain a House majority in 2022.

I almost feel bad for Dems given the outright ineptitude of their leadership, logistics, and retail politics. 

jk

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 28, 2020, 07:31:21 AM

     At the investment site I frequent I criticize the "contrarian" view, though not because it's entirely wrong about how people think in groups. What I notice is that self-identified contrarians are among the most regimented thought producers. Their thoughts on gold, Fed supremacy, monetary inflation and other bugaboos is cookie-cutterish to the max. As it is Above, so it is in the Diner. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/smiley.gif)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on November 28, 2020, 07:34:24 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 28, 2020, 07:17:10 AM
     
     Rest assured, it doesn't. It's more like who gets elected has an effect on foreign polls and opinion.

     Foreign governments are probably in a holding pattern on the Trumpeo Stupid America regime. Accelerated decline understandably makes them nervous. If decline must happen, it should be professionally done. (...)

One aspect being of course, that in a discussion with 4 former Danish Foreign secretaries and a former ambassor in New York, they all agreed that Biden is likely to become the last 'classical', actively Pro-Atlantic and Pro-European US president as they have been known in the post-WWII years.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 28, 2020, 10:22:15 AM
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-28/pennsylvania-judge-backs-trump-claim-in-case-over-mail-voting

This story has come up a couple of times in recent days. How significant is it? I can't tell.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 28, 2020, 10:25:34 AM
     
Quote from: MusicTurner on November 28, 2020, 07:34:24 AM
One aspect being of course, that in a discussion with 4 former Danish Foreign secretaries and a former ambassor in New York, they all agreed that Biden is likely to become the last 'classical', actively Pro-Atlantic and Pro-European US president as they have been known in the post-WWII years.

     Alliances don't disband, they just go quasi-dormant, like The Drudge Report, or become shells like Polaroid.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 28, 2020, 10:39:47 AM
Quote from: T. D. on November 28, 2020, 10:22:15 AM
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-28/pennsylvania-judge-backs-trump-claim-in-case-over-mail-voting

This story has come up a couple of times in recent days. How significant is it? I can't tell.

     There was supposed to be a hearing today but it was canceled because of the appeal. Repubs are arguing that they made procedural errors when they expanded mail in voting. Why this means voters should be disenfranchised for voting according to the law is beyond the minds of mere mortals.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: flyingdutchman on November 28, 2020, 01:11:29 PM
Of course, in the end, what matters when it comes to the election only US voters have any real say. BUT, certainly it is right and appropriate for non-US citizens to state their views and register their utter disgust for the idiot Trump and the equally idiotic fools who led this country down the yellow brick road for the past 4 years.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: bhodges on November 28, 2020, 02:46:25 PM
Quote from: flyingdutchman on November 28, 2020, 01:11:29 PM
Of course, in the end, what matters when it comes to the election only US voters have any real say. BUT, certainly it is right and appropriate for non-US citizens to state their views and register their utter disgust for the idiot Trump and the equally idiotic fools who led this country down the yellow brick road for the past 4 years.

"Right and appropriate," and thank you.

--Bruce
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 28, 2020, 03:20:29 PM
Quote from: drogulus on November 28, 2020, 10:39:47 AM
     There was supposed to be a hearing today but it was canceled because of the appeal. Repubs are arguing that they made procedural errors when they expanded mail in voting. Why this means voters should be disenfranchised for voting according to the law is beyond the minds of mere mortals.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-28/pennsylvania-judge-backs-trump-claim-in-case-over-mail-voting

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court allowed the state to complete its certification of the presidential vote won by Democrat Joe Biden, reversing a temporary delay ordered by a lower court judge and throwing out a challenge filed by state Republicans.

The high court on Saturday rejected the attack on the state's mail-voting law, enacted last year, saying Republicans waited too long to sue. The Supreme Court issued a sharply worded order, turning aside the "extraordinary proposition that the court disenfranchise all 6.9 million Pennsylvanians who voted in the General Election" and throw the decision to the state legislature.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on November 28, 2020, 03:56:06 PM
Trump supporter who gave $2.5m to fight election fraud wants money back (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/nov/28/trump-donor-election-fraud-sues-money-back)

"A Donald Trump supporter who donated $2.5m to help expose and prosecute claims of fraud in the presidential election wants his money back after what he says are "disappointing results".

Fredric Eshelman, a businessman from North Carolina, said he gave the money to True the Vote, a pro-Trump "election ethics" group in Texas that promised to file lawsuits in seven swing states as part of its push to "investigate, litigate, and expose suspected illegal balloting and fraud in the 2020 general election".

But according to a lawsuit Eshelman filed this week in Houston, first reported by Bloomberg, True the Vote dropped its legal actions and discontinued its Validate the Vote 2020 campaign, then refused to return his calls when he demanded an explanation.

The founder of Eshelman Ventures llc, a venture capital company, said he asked "regularly and repeatedly" for updates, the lawsuit asserts, but that his "requests were consistently met with vague responses, platitudes, and empty promises".[...]
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 28, 2020, 04:52:37 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on November 28, 2020, 03:56:06 PM

The founder of Eshelman Ventures llc, a venture capital company, said he asked "regularly and repeatedly" for updates, the lawsuit asserts, but that his "requests were consistently met with vague responses, platitudes, and empty promises".[...]

     It would be a crime against humanity to give money back to someone this dumb.
     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on November 30, 2020, 04:46:34 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 28, 2020, 07:03:55 AM
Of course small, weak countries are affected by electoral outcomes in the US.  That doesn't make fixating on the internal politics of another country rational behavior.  Not at all.
~~

Meh.  The US has been despised for decades.  Longer, even.  The mighty empires of Europe, for instance, were left aghast when the upstart US could summon tens of millions of dollars on a whim to wage war on Spain in 1898.  And despite being "despised", small, weak countries still clamor for protection from the US, and access to US capital markets.  Small, weak countries just can't get enough of US guns and money.  Some small, weak countries - Canada and Mexico come to mind - will never be able to break away from the US, as their entire economic structure is so reliant upon the North American colossus.

Again, most non-American leaders have every opportunity to break away from the existing international order, yet aside from bad guy countries, all they do is complain.  Maybe 2021 is the year things change.  Let's see.

American arrogance on parade:  see above.

"Small and weak" though they may be, these countries do not benefit from association with the USA on account of American beneficence or altruism:  it's on account of mutual advantage.

This is a fact not evident to Donald Trump or, apparently, his supporters.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 30, 2020, 05:00:07 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on November 30, 2020, 04:46:34 AMAmerican arrogance on parade:  see above.

"Small and weak" though they may be, these countries do not benefit from association with the USA on account of American beneficence or altruism:  it's on account of mutual advantage.

This is a fact not evident to Donald Trump or, apparently, his supporters.


Of course small, weak countries benefit from working with the US.  At some point, though - and one would have thought that point had been reached after all the griping of the Trump and before that Bush II years - it would seem reasonable for small, weak countries to start considering alternative structures for international security and finance.  Instead, NATO expanded yet again in 2020 to include another small, weak country clamoring for US protection, and in the wake of both 9/11 and 2007/8, the US dollar is more central to the global economy than before, US Treasuries act as collateral for more financial transactions than before, other countries come hat in hand like beggars to the Fed more frequently, and small, weak countries continue their embarrassing dependence on Uncle Sam and US taxpayers.  No international system lasts forever, as history very clearly demonstrates, but the pathetic response by small, weak countries this century makes one wonder just what it will take for other countries to start pursuing alternatives.  I mean countries that can.  Canada and Mexico are locked in, like it or not. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 30, 2020, 06:50:17 AM
Ongoing (live at the moment):  The US Supreme Court hears arguments in a case involving President Trump's attempt to exclude undocumented immigrants from being counted in the Census. The Supreme Court will also hear a second case that examines the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.

https://www.cnn.com/specials/live-video-1

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 30, 2020, 06:54:50 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 30, 2020, 05:00:07 AM
Of course small, weak countries benefit from working with the US.  At some point, though - and one would have thought that point had been reached after all the griping of the Trump and before that Bush II years - it would seem reasonable for small, weak countries to start considering alternative structures for international security and finance.  Instead, NATO expanded yet again in 2020 to include another small, weak country clamoring for US protection, and in the wake of both 9/11 and 2007/8, the US dollar is more central to the global economy than before, US Treasuries act as collateral for more financial transactions than before, other countries come hat in hand like beggars to the Fed more frequently, and small, weak countries continue their embarrassing dependence on Uncle Sam and US taxpayers.  No international system lasts forever, as history very clearly demonstrates, but the pathetic response by small, weak countries this century makes one wonder just what it will take for other countries to start pursuing alternatives.  I mean countries that can.  Canada and Mexico are locked in, like it or not.

The small, weak country that is Romania was enormously helped into existence by three foreign persons: Napoleon III, Georges Clemenceau and Woodrow Wilson. I am ashamed, and publicly state it, that neither of them is honored in Romania by a statue, or an avenue/square name.

As for our dependence on USA, I'll just quote a former Romanian president (the best so far): "I'd rather give a blowjob to the POTUS than to Putin" --- if you'll excuse my his French.  ;D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 30, 2020, 07:24:20 AM

     I refuse to be embarrassed on behalf of small weak countries oppressed by the Yankee dollar. Let them be unembarrassed. Let the Fed be as responsible as it deems fit.

     The US buys more from the world than it sells in goods and services, so the world saves in Treasuries. The Chinese might be embarrassed by this arrangement even though they are not small and weak. China has high hopes that one day they can replace the dollar. I think it has dawned on them that they must be big consumers first if they want the world to save Chinese money.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 30, 2020, 07:39:39 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 30, 2020, 06:54:50 AM
The small, weak country that is Romania was enormously helped into existence by three foreign persons: Napoleon III, Georges Clemenceau and Woodrow Wilson. I am ashamed, and publicly state it, that neither of them is honored in Romania by a statue, or an avenue/square name.


Wait long enough, and people start toppling statues of various personages.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 30, 2020, 07:43:22 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 30, 2020, 07:39:39 AM
Wait long enough, and people start toppling statues of various personages.

Btw, if all names even remotely or obliquely related to slavery and racism should be get rid of, then how about the Democratic Party?  ;D ;D ;D





Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 30, 2020, 08:15:35 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 30, 2020, 07:43:22 AM
Btw, if all names even remotely or obliquely related to slavery and racism should be get rid of, then how about the Democratic Party?  ;D ;D ;D


Shhhh!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 30, 2020, 08:34:48 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 30, 2020, 08:15:35 AM
Shhhh!

Has the Democratic Party ever officially and publicly apologized for its blatantly racist and slavery-supporting past ?







Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: North Star on November 30, 2020, 08:40:37 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 30, 2020, 06:54:50 AM
The small, weak country that is Romania was enormously helped into existence by three foreign persons: Napoleon III, Georges Clemenceau and Woodrow Wilson. I am ashamed, and publicly state it, that neither of them is honored in Romania by a statue, or an avenue/square name.

As for our dependence on USA, I'll just quote a former Romanian president (the best so far): "I'd rather give a blowjob to the POTUS than to Putin" --- if you'll excuse my his French.  ;D
Whereas Finland owes its independence to Lenin and Hitler, and was declared a war on by the UK (together with Romania and Hungary). I am ashamed to say that there is a statue of Lenin still in the coastal city of Kotka, erected in 1979, a gift from the city of Tallinn. And also a couple of statues in the Tampere Lenin museum (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tampere_Lenin_Museum).

La multi ani, Andrei!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 30, 2020, 08:44:39 AM
Quote from: North Star on November 30, 2020, 08:40:37 AM
Whereas Finland owes its independence to Lenin and Hitler, and was declared a war on by the UK (together with Romania and Hungary). I am ashamed to say that there is a statue of Lenin still in the coastal city of Kotka, erected in 1979, a gift from the city of Tallinn. And also a couple of statues in the Tampere Lenin museum (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tampere_Lenin_Museum).

Romania 3 - Finland 2.   ;D

I do wonder though: when and why did Romania declare war on Finland?  :o
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 30, 2020, 08:45:39 AM
Quote from: North Star on November 30, 2020, 08:40:37 AM
La multi ani, Andrei!

Thank you, Karlo, many happy returns to you too!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: North Star on November 30, 2020, 08:50:35 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 30, 2020, 08:44:39 AM
Romania 3 - Finland 2.   ;D

I do wonder though: when and why did Romania declare war on Finland?  :o
No, the UK declared war on Finland, Romania and Hungary in World War II.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 30, 2020, 08:53:07 AM
Quote from: North Star on November 30, 2020, 08:50:35 AM
No, the UK declared war on Finland, Romania and Hungary in World War II.

Ah, okay, got it.  :)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 30, 2020, 08:53:14 AM
     Repubs have yet to officially apologize for Lincoln. Seriously, though, we don't really need the words, do we?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 30, 2020, 08:55:46 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 30, 2020, 08:53:14 AM
     Repubs have yet to officially apologize for Lincoln.

Why?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 30, 2020, 09:05:54 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 30, 2020, 08:55:46 AM
Why?

     An official repudiation might ruffle the feathers of that portion of Repubs who wish to fantasize that they belong to the "Party of Lincoln". It's not how I do things, as I think a political party is what it does more than what its name used to mean.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 30, 2020, 09:20:27 AM

Quote from: North Star on November 30, 2020, 08:40:37 AM
Whereas Finland owes its independence to Lenin and Hitler, and was declared a war on by the UK (together with Romania and Hungary). I am ashamed to say that there is a statue of Lenin still in the coastal city of Kotka, erected in 1979, a gift from the city of Tallinn. And also a couple of statues in the Tampere Lenin museum (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tampere_Lenin_Museum).

La multi ani, Andrei!

     Lenin recognized Finnish independence after Finland declared it.

     From the Encyclopedia Drogulania:

By a law of July 1917 it was decided that all the authority previously wielded by the emperor (apart from defense and foreign policy) should be exercised by the Finnish Parliament. After Russia was taken over by the Bolsheviks in November 1917 Parliament issued a declaration of independence for Finland on December 6, 1917, which was recognized by Lenin and his government on the last day of the year.

     I guess that's worth a statue.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 30, 2020, 09:27:39 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 30, 2020, 08:34:48 AM
Has the Democratic Party ever officially and publicly apologized for its blatantly racist and slavery-supporting past ?


I think some Dems have.  Some even pay lip service to reparations from time to time, as though that may happen. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 30, 2020, 10:34:09 AM
Quote from: drogulus on November 30, 2020, 09:05:54 AM
     I think a political party is what it does more than what its name used to mean.

Then I guess you'd be in favor of lifting the current ban on the Romanian Communist Parrty.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on November 30, 2020, 10:55:50 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 30, 2020, 06:54:50 AM
The small, weak country that is Romania was enormously helped into existence by three foreign persons: Napoleon III, Georges Clemenceau and Woodrow Wilson. I am ashamed, and publicly state it, that neither of them is honored in Romania by a statue, or an avenue/square name.

As for our dependence on USA, I'll just quote a former Romanian president (the best so far): "I'd rather give a blowjob to the POTUS than to Putin" --- if you'll excuse my his French.  ;D

Wilson was an old style racist Democrat who actively pushed blacks out of the federal civil service, among other things. Princeton over the summer began the ritual process of de-Wilsoning its campus. Definitely not a person to be statued.

[And that's over and above the question of whether his approach to post WWI peace helped lay the groundwork for WWII.]
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 30, 2020, 11:07:11 AM
Quote from: JBS on November 30, 2020, 10:55:50 AM
Wilson was an old style racist [...]

So was Voltaire, the icon of the Enlightenment. He even traded slaves. Go tell the French he's definitely not a person to be statued or avenued.

Quote
[And that's over and above the question of whether his approach to post WWI peace helped lay the groundwork for WWII.]

His 14 Points greatly helped Greater Romania into being recognized internationally. That's merit enough for me.

Heck, there are Karl Marx* squares in France or Lenin statues in Finland. Why, and whom, should a Wilson square in Bucharest offend?

*Not to mention that none other than Jean-Claude Juncker sang the praises of Karl Marx a few years ago --- much to the indignation of Poles, Romanians and Baltics.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 30, 2020, 11:19:34 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 30, 2020, 09:27:39 AM
I think some Dems have. 

Honor and respect to them!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 30, 2020, 11:46:56 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 30, 2020, 10:34:09 AM
Then I guess you'd be in favor of lifting the current ban on the Romanian Communist Parrty.

     I don't know how your ban works. Are you banning people, or a name, or outlawing an ideology?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 30, 2020, 12:03:32 PM
Quote from: drogulus on November 30, 2020, 11:46:56 AM
     I don't know how your ban works. Are you banning people, or a name, or outlawing an ideology?

Romanian Criminal Code, Article 166.

Totalitarian State Propaganda

Any public propaganda in favor of establishing a totaliitarian state, by any means whatsoever, shall be punished by a 6-month to 5-year prison sentence and the interdict of some civil rights.

In the sense of this article, propaganda means systematically spreading or defending ideas, notions or doctrines intended to convince or attract new members.


Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 30, 2020, 12:18:35 PM
Quote from: Florestan on November 30, 2020, 12:03:32 PM
Romanian Criminal Code, Article 166.

Totalitarian State Propaganda

Any public propaganda in favor of establishing a totaliitarian state, by any means whatsoever, shall be punished by 6-month to 5-year prison and the interdict of some civil rights.

In the sense of this article, propaganda means systematically spreading or defending ideas, notions or doctrines intended to convince or attract new members.




     Wow, that sucks. You don't have to get kooky and give free speech rights to money, but can't you at least protect the speech rights of people? I'd be worried that the idea of totalitarian speech would be defined as what the government wants to prohibit.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 30, 2020, 12:42:17 PM
Quote from: drogulus on November 30, 2020, 12:18:35 PM
     Wow, that sucks. You don't have to get kooky and give free speech rights to money, but can't you at least protect the speech rights of people? I'd be worried that the idea of totalitarian speech would be defined as what the government wants to prohibit.

I do agree that the legalese sucks ---after all, democratically elected lawmakers are not the brightest of people --- but the idea is right. It covers Communists, Fascists and Nazists.

It's really easy for you, who have never ever experienced the consequences of any totalitarian propaganda, to dismiss such criminal code regulations as dangerous --- yet by  my personal experience I am absolutely sure that giving unconditional leeway to Communists, Fascists and Nazists would only aid and abet them. Crushing them in their craddle is the safest route to take --- just imagine Lenin being hanged immediately after stepping on Russian soil, or Hitler being hanged immediatelly after the Beer Hall Putsch.  ;D


Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 30, 2020, 01:20:22 PM
Quote from: Florestan on November 30, 2020, 12:42:17 PM
I do agree that the legalese sucks ---after all, democratically elected lawmakers are not the brightest of people --- but the idea is right. It covers Communists, Fascists and Nazists.

It's really easy for you, who have never ever experienced the consequences of any totalitarian propaganda, to dismiss such criminal code regulations as dangerous --- yet by  my personal experience I am absolutely sure that giving unconditional leeway to Communists, Fascists and Nazists would only aid and abet them. Crushing them in their craddle is the safest route to take --- just imagine Lenin being hanged immediately after stepping on Russian soil, or Hitler being hanged immediatelly after the Beer Hall Putsch.  ;D




     If citizens don't want a free country it will never be easy to achieve it. It's not the ideas of Nazis that will undermine the future of a country, it's the ideas of a greater number of citizens who give up on freedom because it's dangerous. Free countries have one thing in common above all else. They permit the expression of unpopular ideas, even at some risk that they are dangerous. They don't emulate what they hate.

      In a country that has grown up with free speech people exercise their brain muscles to combat truly bad ideas. The country will withstand Trumpist hatemongering with no ban, and not even the suggestion of one. It must be disappointing to some Trumpists that no one is going to crush them or outlaw their propaganda or convert them to Islam. They even get to keep their guns! (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/cheesy.gif)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 30, 2020, 01:25:38 PM
Quote from: drogulus on November 30, 2020, 01:20:22 PM
     If citizens don't want a free country it will never be easy to achieve it. It's not the ideas of Nazis that will undermine the future of a country, it's the ideas of a greater number of citizens who give up on freedom because it's dangerous. Free countries have one thing in common above all else. They permit the expression of unpopular ideas, even at some risk that they are dangerous. They don't emulate what they hate.

      In a country that has grown up with free speech people exercise their brain muscles to combat truly bad ideas. The country will withstand Trumpist hatemongering with no ban, and not even the suggestion of one. It must be disappointing to some Trumpists that no one is going to crush them or outlaw their propaganda or convert them to Islam. They even get to keep their guns! (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/cheesy.gif)

All this blah blah blah amounts to this: no matter what the Criminal Code of Romania says, the USA during Trump's presidency has never been anything else than a constitutional republic where the rule of law reigned supreme. I do agree.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on November 30, 2020, 01:28:59 PM
Quote from: Florestan on November 30, 2020, 01:25:38 PMAll this blah blah blah amounts to this: no matter what the Criminal Code of Romania says, the USA during Trump's presidency has never been anything else than a constitutional republic where the rule of law reigned supreme.


There are people who think otherwise?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 30, 2020, 01:31:02 PM
Quote from: Todd on November 30, 2020, 01:28:59 PM
There are people who think otherwise?

Yes there are. Lots of them. Look no further than GMG. Look no fuirther than drogulus.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 30, 2020, 01:41:14 PM
Quote from: Florestan on November 30, 2020, 01:25:38 PM
All this blah blah blah amounts to this: no matter what the Criminal Code of Romania says, the USA during Trump's presidency has never been anything else than a constitutional republic where the rule of law reigned supreme. I do agree.

     Exactly so. The Deep State performed the way it was supposed to. The government of laws prevailed without the need to crush enemies. Repub election officials did their duty and resisted pressure to act corruptly. Nobody got banned or arrested for blatant lying.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 30, 2020, 01:49:36 PM
Quote from: drogulus on November 30, 2020, 01:41:14 PM
     Exactly so. The Deep State performed the way it was supposed to. The government of laws prevailed without the need to crush enemies. Repub election officials did their duty and resisted pressure to act corruptly. Nobody got banned or arrested for blatant lying.

And yet Trump was a would-be Fascist dictator who sought to undermine the USA Republic, and succeeded at least with respect to elections. The USA constitutional republicanism is much weaker today than it was before Trump and the fact that he's been voted out of power is no evidence that he was not a Fascist. Be honest (if you can): ain't all this what you've been claiming all along?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 30, 2020, 02:00:46 PM
Quote from: Florestan on November 30, 2020, 01:49:36 PM
And yet Trump was a would-be Fascist dictator who sought to undermine the USA Republic, and succeeded at least with respect to elections. The USA constitutional republicanism is much weaker today than it was before Trump and the fact that he's been voted out of power is no evidence that he was not a Fascist. Be honest (if you can): ain't all this what you've been claiming all along?

      Trump wanted to undermine the government without having a manifesto to guide his actions, so on that point I agree Trump doesn't qualify as a fascist. His actions are for himself, and the movement he inspired is one of loyalty to him, though it has strong resemblance to fascism on the Big Lie front, the stab in the back myth, hostility to international cooperation, intellectuals and elites generally, hatred of immigrants and sadism as policy. How fascist Trump is depends on the weight you give to each factor.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on November 30, 2020, 02:19:13 PM
Quote from: drogulus on November 30, 2020, 02:00:46 PM
      Trump wanted to undermine the government

Mind-reading.

Besides, Trump wanted his government to Make America Great Again. How could he have simultaneously done that and undermined the government is a mystery that future generations, wiser than ours, will have to ponder.

Quotethe stab in the back myth

The stab in the back myth is Nazi, not Fascist.

Quotehostility to international cooperation,

The Berlin-Roma-Tokyo axis? Heck, Marshal Antonescu adhered to it as well.

Quoteintellectuals and elites generally

Fascism was intellectually defined, promoted and supported by such luminariies and intellectual elites as Gentile, Marinetti, Malaparte, Pirandello, Pizetti, Ungaretti.

Quotehatred of immigrants

There were no immigrants in Italy before, during, or after Mussolini took power.

QuoteHow fascist Trump is depends on the weight you give to each factor.

Trump is no Fascist at all.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 30, 2020, 03:09:31 PM

     The stab in the back myth was also used by Mussolini. Trump's mind is revealed by what he said and did. Alliances of ultranationalists don't fare well. Non cooperator states don't play nice with each other. Who knew?..... besides everyone, that is.

     Another factor is the support Trump received from avowed American fascists. I don't give them a veto but I do take their words and actions as strong evidence. I suppose their recognition might be a "next best thing" phenomenon.

     Another another factor is how scholars of fascism take the question seriously enough to consider evidence pro and con. No major political figure has been treated like that. It's not like leftists calling conservatives fascist, which scholars rightly ignore.

     Is Trump a fascist? 8 experts weigh in. (https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/21521958/what-is-fascism-signs-donald-trump)

     If a consensus could be reached it would come out somewhere around "not quite".
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 30, 2020, 08:11:28 PM
Quote from: Florestan on November 30, 2020, 01:49:36 PM
And yet Trump was a would-be Fascist dictator who sought to undermine the USA Republic, and succeeded at least with respect to elections. The USA constitutional republicanism is much weaker today than it was before Trump and the fact that he's been voted out of power is no evidence that he was not a Fascist. Be honest (if you can): ain't all this what you've been claiming all along?
As usual for me, I have a non-sequitur here as this back and forth seems to me to have gotten enough play here. I agree a little with both sides here: Yes, Tump has produced a lot of boring and drooling hysteria; most of my friends endlessly meme in this vein; I'm glad it's all over (said Captain Sensible). Yes, tump was often THAT BAD in his failings and his verbiage at least.
So here's my non sequitur: who is tump like exactly from history? He's definitely an entertainingly weird guy - for me, the type of guy who would never get within 10 feet of management over anything if not for being born with a silver spoon in his mouth.
I was listening to a description of MacArthur and I thought he sounded a lot like turmp (except for the empirical facts supporting that MacArthur possessed real genius): grandiose idea of himself (talked about himself in the third person), a diva, overdramatic, great PR (and his communiques were always about himself), rather divorced from reality, accused of being pathologically mentally unfit by his peers, etc.
Does this sound right?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on November 30, 2020, 08:42:44 PM

     Fascism may be the most entertaining political aberration. They make hate fun. The Communists are boring. They don't know how to par-tee.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 30, 2020, 11:41:11 PM
Quote from: Florestan on November 30, 2020, 02:19:13 PM
Mind-reading.

Besides, Trump wanted his government to Make America Great Again. How could he have simultaneously done that and undermined the government is a mystery that future generations, wiser than ours, will have to ponder.



That's easy. That slogan was a lie, like pretty much everything. Hitler promised a Thousand Year Reich that only lasted ten years. But he kept on promising, because the little people need this.

The problem here is you have this need to believe the big man (I mean Trump); the same problem occurred with the GMG-er currently conducting his own psycho-analysis on another thread: if you can't conceive of a con-man telling a lie; if you want to take everything at face value, you're the con-man's mark.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on December 01, 2020, 12:06:12 AM
Other than this there is some heavy indulgence in "but Trump did not make it" so you can't say he has overwhelmning authoritarian leanings.

As has been mentioned before this is the same as acquitting a team of failed bank heisters who break in a bank and blow up the safe only to find there is no money. Ineptitude and stupidity does not equal a get out of jail free card.

And Trump did do a lot of damage to the system.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on December 01, 2020, 01:01:26 AM
Quote from: Herman on December 01, 2020, 12:06:12 AM
Other than this there is some heavy indulgence in "but Trump did not make it" so you can't say he has overwhelmning authoritarian leanings.

As has been mentioned before this is the same as acquitting a team of failed bank heisters who break in a bank and blow up the safe only to find there is no money. Ineptitude and stupidity does not equal a get out of jail free card.

And Trump did do a lot of damage to the system.
Just a thought but maybe it's the psychic damage to us. Tump is such a strange case because he's not a little anything. He's the embodiment so much though. I feel sad because of what it says about the American people or maybe just people. I could never have imagined that a person like him could be elevated, let alone revered. It hurts that he's so good at being bad at being anything good. I can't name one thing he's really good at. Some people seemed to think he was a really persuasive person (is it Scott Adams?). Huh? That guy wreaks of insincerity and cheapness. We've all been dirtied. There's very little satisfaction at even beating him.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on December 01, 2020, 02:50:31 AM
I'd say he's a A1 snake oil salesman, i.e. marketeer.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on December 01, 2020, 03:36:43 AM
Quote from: Todd on November 30, 2020, 05:00:07 AM

Of course small, weak countries benefit from working with the US.  At some point, though - and one would have thought that point had been reached after all the griping of the Trump and before that Bush II years - it would seem reasonable for small, weak countries to start considering alternative structures for international security and finance.  Instead, NATO expanded yet again in 2020 to include another small, weak country clamoring for US protection, and in the wake of both 9/11 and 2007/8, the US dollar is more central to the global economy than before, US Treasuries act as collateral for more financial transactions than before, other countries come hat in hand like beggars to the Fed more frequently, and small, weak countries continue their embarrassing dependence on Uncle Sam and US taxpayers.  No international system lasts forever, as history very clearly demonstrates, but the pathetic response by small, weak countries this century makes one wonder just what it will take for other countries to start pursuing alternatives.  I mean countries that can.  Canada and Mexico are locked in, like it or not.

... A warped view of international relations and the place "small and weak" as well as the presently large & strong.

Sure, small, weak countries benefit from working with the USA;  sure, Canada and Mexico and others are "locked in".  The World benefits from international system in general, and last I checked the USA was still part of the world.

At this point in history is the USA is the largest and strongest player in the international system, but as you say, international systems come and go.  Should small, weak countries be looking elsewhere than to the USA for largest & strongest?  Is this what you mean by "alternatives"?

One thing is for damned sure and that is that the USA benefits from the international system.  Consider that Americans' indulgences resulting in a huge US deficit in goods & services which is financed by foreigners buying USD-denominated securities.  Hell yeah, the international system is propping up the USA.  If the small and weak start to look elsewhere that the USA, the US trade deficit problem will solve itself PDQ.

From one POV the USA may be seen as a parasite on the international system in that consumers more that it produces.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on December 01, 2020, 05:17:35 AM
Person you're talking to doesn't really know there's a world outside the US.

Typical American thinking US = World. (See: the World Series.)

And then there's the typical bipolar grievance / pride: "everybody hates us" / "the entire world wants to immigrate to the US".

Most people like the US just fine, binge-watching Hollywood made series and getting just as obese as 'Mericans.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 01, 2020, 05:51:15 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on December 01, 2020, 03:36:43 AM
... A warped view of international relations and the place "small and weak" as well as the presently large & strong.

Incorrect.


Quote from: Fëanor on December 01, 2020, 03:36:43 AMThe World benefits from international system in general

Vague to the point of irrelevance.


Quote from: Fëanor on December 01, 2020, 03:36:43 AMShould small, weak countries be looking elsewhere than to the USA for largest & strongest?  Is this what you mean by "alternatives"?

No.  There will be no shift in unipolarity from one hegemon to another. 


Quote from: Fëanor on December 01, 2020, 03:36:43 AMOne thing is for damned sure and that is that the USA benefits from the international system.  Consider that Americans' indulgences resulting in a huge US deficit in goods & services which is financed by foreigners buying USD-denominated securities.  Hell yeah, the international system is propping up the USA.  If the small and weak start to look elsewhere that the USA, the US trade deficit problem will solve itself PDQ.

The US does benefit.  The existing framework has outlived its usefulness, and an alternative is needed, and has been for a long time.  Your statement about the US trade deficit does not comport with either statistical evidence or any extant international trade theory.


Quote from: Fëanor on December 01, 2020, 03:36:43 AMFrom one POV the USA may be seen as a parasite on the international system in that consumers more that it produces.

Correct.  Which simply reinforces the idea that non-Americans should begin seeking alternatives.


Quote from: Herman on December 01, 2020, 05:17:35 AM
Person you're talking to doesn't really know there's a world outside the US.

Typical American thinking US = World. (See: the World Series.)

And then there's the typical bipolar grievance / pride: "everybody hates us" / "the entire world wants to immigrate to the US".

Most people like the US just fine, binge-watching Hollywood made series and getting just as obese as 'Mericans.

Incorrect.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on December 01, 2020, 06:18:31 AM
Quote from: Todd on December 01, 2020, 05:51:15 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on December 01, 2020, 03:36:43 AM
...
One thing is for damned sure and that is that the USA benefits from the international system.  Consider that Americans' indulgences resulting in a huge US deficit in goods & services which is financed by foreigners buying USD-denominated securities.  Hell yeah, the international system is propping up the USA.  If the small and weak start to look elsewhere that the USA, the US trade deficit problem will solve itself PDQ.
...

The US does benefit.  The existing framework has outlived its usefulness, and an alternative is needed, and has been for a long time.  Your statement about the US trade deficit does not comport with either statistical evidence or any extant international trade theory.


Au contraire, the USA's huge trade deficit is very clear ...

(https://cdn.statcdn.com/Infographic/images/normal/17281.jpeg)

It is simply an economic fact that a nation's capital surplus/deficit must precisely offset it's trade & services deficit/surplus.

The USA is an historical anomaly.  In the 19th century  for instance the UK was the "largest and strongest" nation in the world but it generally ran trade surpluses and was an net exporter of capital, (much of which when to the USA to finance railroads, etc.).  Can the USA continued in its privileged situation indefinitely?  It will for while but not forever
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 01, 2020, 06:49:50 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on December 01, 2020, 03:36:43 AM

One thing is for damned sure and that is that the USA benefits from the international system.  Consider that Americans' indulgences resulting in a huge US deficit in goods & services which is financed by foreigners buying USD-denominated securities.  Hell yeah, the international system is propping up the USA.  If the small and weak start to look elsewhere that the USA, the US trade deficit problem will solve itself PDQ.


     The US buys goods from our trading partners, and they bank with us. China and other partners shift their savings from a reserve account at the Fed to a securities account. All we owe to China is the interest we offer them of our own volition. They have what we supposedly owe them, an interest bearing account at the Federal Reserve.

     The US employs a huge number of workers around the world in a very nonparasitic way. What would the Chinese workers do if we didn't buy their output?

Quote from: Fëanor on December 01, 2020, 06:18:31 AM
Can the USA continued in its privileged situation indefinitely? 

     Yes, it can, but indefinite only means that goods for currency isn't inherently unstable. The world won't run out of goods to sell and despite the best efforts of economic charlatans the US will not run out of dollars. That is not a prediction that the balance won't change, only that the theory advanced here would not be the reason.

     It's pretty much the same sort of unsustainability as the national debt pseudo-crisis. There's supposedly an upper limit on nominal savings, and when we hit that "some day" dollars won't spend any more.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 01, 2020, 06:50:01 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on December 01, 2020, 06:18:31 AM
The US does benefit.  The existing framework has outlived its usefulness, and an alternative is needed, and has been for a long time.  Your statement about the US trade deficit does not comport with either statistical evidence or any extant international trade theory.



Au contraire, the USA's huge trade deficit is very clear ...

(https://cdn.statcdn.com/Infographic/images/normal/17281.jpeg)

It is simply an economic fact that a nation's capital surplus/deficit must precisely offset it's trade & services deficit/surplus.

The USA is an historical anomaly.  In the 19th century  for instance the UK was the "largest and strongest" nation in the world but it generally ran trade surpluses and was an net exporter of capital, (much of which when to the USA to finance railroads, etc.).  Can the USA continued in its privileged situation indefinitely?  It will for while but not forever


I am well aware of US trade statistics.  I am well aware of the UK's trade history, and the fact that UK trade at the height of empire was skewed because of its reliance on exploiting colonies.  I am also aware of the trade patterns and impact on global trade of the only other historical antecedent to the US, the Mongolian Empire.  While interesting, those facts do not change the associated underlying structural facts that allow the US to continue to run immense trade deficits, which do not matter nearly as much as people assert.  Nor does trade theory change.

To be clear, I have openly advocated for a dissolution of the existing international system for years.  It cannot last forever.  What I hope to see is a dissolution of the existing system without the very frequent cause of prior dissolutions: great power war.


Quote from: Herman on December 01, 2020, 06:22:47 AM
You're trying to talk to someone who doesn't do facts. Only alternative facts.

Incorrect.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on December 01, 2020, 08:24:41 AM
Quote from: Todd on December 01, 2020, 06:50:01 AM
I am well aware of US trade statistics.  I am well aware of the UK's trade history, and the fact that UK trade at the height of empire was skewed because of its reliance on exploiting colonies.  I am also aware of the trade patterns and impact on global trade of the only other historical antecedent to the US, the Mongolian Empire.  While interesting, those facts do not change the associated underlying structural facts that allow the US to continue to run immense trade deficits, which do not matter nearly as much as people assert.  Nor does trade theory change.

Well without trade deficits and corresponding capital surpluses American consumers wouldn't be nearly as well off as they are. ;)

Quote from: Todd on December 01, 2020, 06:50:01 AM
To be clear, I have openly advocated for a dissolution of the existing international system for years.  It cannot last forever.  What I hope to see is a dissolution of the existing system without the very frequent cause of prior dissolutions: great power war.

If you're going to sweep away the existing international system you ought to know what to replace it with and how you're going to do that.

Personally I'd soon be parasitized by the USA than by China.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 01, 2020, 09:00:18 AM
     If the international order can't last forever what's the point of dissolution? Is it a virtue signal?

Quote from: Fëanor on December 01, 2020, 08:24:41 AM

If you're going to sweep away the existing international system you ought to know what to replace it with and how you're going to do that.



     No one needs to know how the world order will evolve into something different in order for it to happen. It's a big ship with a small policy rudder to nudge it this way or that. My preferred nudge is in the direction of countries making each other great again and not everyone making themselves above average separately.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 01, 2020, 09:46:36 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/01/trump-campaign-files-election-lawsuit-in-wisconsin-after-state-declares-biden-won-.html
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 01, 2020, 10:23:17 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on December 01, 2020, 08:24:41 AMWell without trade deficits and corresponding capital surpluses American consumers wouldn't be nearly as well off as they are.

That may not be the case.  And even if the US were less materially well off, so?


Quote from: Fëanor on December 01, 2020, 08:24:41 AMIf you're going to sweep away the existing international system you ought to know what to replace it with and how you're going to do that.

Sure, and that would be a vastly scaled back framework in which the US relies solely on offshore balancing to prevent regional hegemony in key areas, while dissolving the outdated post-war institutions that no longer serve the same purpose they did before.  Outright dissolution may not be needed in all cases.  For instance, the UN could remain as a hollow talking shop, and its headquarters could be moved to, say, Brussels.  Or Nairobi, who cares?


Quote from: Fëanor on December 01, 2020, 08:24:41 AMPersonally I'd soon be parasitized by the USA than by China.

A fairly common refrain, but a simultaneously bizarre and irrelevant one.  The US should pursue strategic security and financial policies focused on US interest above all else.  If small regional wars pop up here and there, that's fine.  The US does not need to be directly involved.  Or, alternatively, it may even make sense for the US to pursue destabilization policies in some instances.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on December 01, 2020, 10:27:10 AM
Quote from: T. D. on December 01, 2020, 09:46:36 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/01/trump-campaign-files-election-lawsuit-in-wisconsin-after-state-declares-biden-won-.html
Still shaking my head in disbelief at this guy....  :( ??? ::)  The waste of time, money and the courts' time(s)....$3 million; money that could have gone to feeding people?

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 01, 2020, 10:48:43 AM
OTOH,

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/01/doj-has-not-found-fraud-that-would-reverse-biden-win-over-trump-barr-says-.html

That's a surprise. Really. There's no bigger Cheeto puppet than Barr.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 01, 2020, 10:52:04 AM

     DOJ has not found fraud that would reverse Biden win over Trump, Attorney General William Barr says (https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/01/doj-has-not-found-fraud-that-would-reverse-biden-win-over-trump-barr-says-.html)

Quote from: Todd on December 01, 2020, 10:23:17 AM


The US should pursue strategic security and financial policies focused on US interest above all else. 

     We do. Our interests are defended above all else by our alliances or we wouldn't have them. We can nudge them in a direction that we deem more favorable without defining interests so narrowly that we give up the advantages we get from positive sum arrangements. The world order doesn't have to be collapsed into wasteful chaos any more than the minimum that occurs whether we like it or not. Of course my nudge is for less "war of all against all" because I love peace almost as much as I love freedom and prosperity. I have to make compromises on all these wants, an OK thing.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 01, 2020, 11:13:47 AM
Quote from: T. D. on December 01, 2020, 10:48:43 AM
OTOH,

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/01/doj-has-not-found-fraud-that-would-reverse-biden-win-over-trump-barr-says-.html

That's a surprise. Really. There's no bigger Cheeto puppet than Barr.

     Trump's election lawyers have responded to Barr's statement by saying he hasn't investigated the election, which is true. The AG is aware of efforts to create cases out of nothing and has nothing to add to what the judges have said about the nonsense presented to them.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 01, 2020, 11:15:23 AM

     Barr is at the WH now. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/evil.gif)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 01, 2020, 11:38:24 AM

     Another Official Is Ousted From the Pentagon (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/01/us/politics/pentagon-firing.html?action=click&module=RelatedLinks&pgtype=Article)

The ouster of the official, Christopher P. Maier, the head of the Pentagon's Defeat ISIS Task Force since March 2017, came just three weeks after President Trump fired Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper and three other Pentagon officials, and replaced them with loyalists.

Mr. Maier's team served as a clearinghouse for the government's counterterrorism operations and policies. It was in the midst of answering dozens of questions from the incoming Biden team about the status of terrorist threats, relations with allies and counterterrorism missions when his team was disbanded. Now team members will be scattered across the vast Pentagon bureaucracy or returned to their home agencies.

Whether deliberate or not, the move by the newly promoted Pentagon leadership to eliminate that central hub will almost certainly slow the flow of counterterrorism information to Biden transition aides in the coming weeks, several officials said.


     If they can't stop the Biden transition they can at least cripple the Pentagon's counterterrorism shop. Good job.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on December 01, 2020, 12:52:11 PM
Quote from: T. D. on December 01, 2020, 10:48:43 AM
OTOH,

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/01/doj-has-not-found-fraud-that-would-reverse-biden-win-over-trump-barr-says-.html

That's a surprise. Really. There's no bigger Cheeto puppet than Barr.
Lifting my jaw off of the floor now....
Quote from: drogulus on December 01, 2020, 11:13:47 AM
     Trump's election lawyers have responded to Barr's statement by saying he hasn't investigated the election, which is true. The AG is aware of efforts to create cases out of nothing and has nothing to add to what the judges have said about the nonsense presented to them.
Why waste the time and expend the effort?
Quote from: drogulus on December 01, 2020, 11:38:24 AM
     Another Official Is Ousted From the Pentagon (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/01/us/politics/pentagon-firing.html?action=click&module=RelatedLinks&pgtype=Article)

The ouster of the official, Christopher P. Maier, the head of the Pentagon's Defeat ISIS Task Force since March 2017, came just three weeks after President Trump fired Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper and three other Pentagon officials, and replaced them with loyalists.

Mr. Maier's team served as a clearinghouse for the government's counterterrorism operations and policies. It was in the midst of answering dozens of questions from the incoming Biden team about the status of terrorist threats, relations with allies and counterterrorism missions when his team was disbanded. Now team members will be scattered across the vast Pentagon bureaucracy or returned to their home agencies.

Whether deliberate or not, the move by the newly promoted Pentagon leadership to eliminate that central hub will almost certainly slow the flow of counterterrorism information to Biden transition aides in the coming weeks, several officials said.


     If they can't stop the Biden transition they can at least cripple the Pentagon's counterterrorism shop. Good job.


Oh, God help us!!!

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 01, 2020, 01:15:38 PM
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-12-01/pardoning-giuliani-would-put-trump-in-legal-jeopardy

This is funny. According to the NYT, the possibility of Cheeto Mussolini pardoning Ghouliani has been bandied about. Could get interesting.

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/12/01/us/joe-biden-trump#giuliani-is-said-to-have-discussed-a-possible-pardon-with-trump
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on December 01, 2020, 01:26:56 PM
Quote from: T. D. on December 01, 2020, 01:15:38 PM
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-12-01/pardoning-giuliani-would-put-trump-in-legal-jeopardy

This is funny. According to the NYT, the possibility of Cheeto Mussolini pardoning Ghouliani has been bandied about. Could get interesting.

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/12/01/us/joe-biden-trump#giuliani-is-said-to-have-discussed-a-possible-pardon-with-trump
Interesting!  I was able to read the article here (for free):  https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/pardoning-giuliani-would-put-trump-in-legal-jeopardy/ar-BB1bxcCg

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 01, 2020, 03:22:22 PM

     Justice Department investigating potential presidential pardon bribery scheme, court records reveal (https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/01/politics/presidential-pardon-justice-department/index.html)

"The political strategy to obtain a presidential pardon was 'parallel' to and distinct from [redacted]'s role as an attorney-advocate for [redacted name]," Howell wrote in her court order.

     No, I don't see any clues to the identity of these redacts.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 01, 2020, 03:53:56 PM
Quote from: drogulus on December 01, 2020, 03:22:22 PM
     Justice Department investigating potential presidential pardon bribery scheme, court records reveal (https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/01/politics/presidential-pardon-justice-department/index.html)

"The political strategy to obtain a presidential pardon was 'parallel' to and distinct from [redacted]'s role as an attorney-advocate for [redacted name]," Howell wrote in her court order.

     No, I don't see any clues to the identity of these redacts.
:laugh:
Yeah, they really obscured the identity!
Maybe it'll cause another meltdown!
(https://www.nydailynews.com/resizer/0t61EAT5eza-wPloDc4-hQD3qdA=/800x533/top/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/tronc/QBF2OUH75VGUHA3QMZF7NG6EKE.jpg)

But it's the DOJ, run by Cheeto Über-toady Barr. How far do you think the investigation will go?  :laugh:

https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2020-55153918
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-12-01/trump-accused-by-gop-official-of-inspiring-threats-of-violence

Georgia's Republican voting system manager denounced President Donald Trump and the state's two Republican U.S. senators for not condemning, and even encouraging through silence, the threats of violence being made against election workers and the state's top elections official.

His voice shaking with anger, the normally even-keeled Gabriel Sterling said his boss, Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a Republican, had received death threats, has had Trump supporters driving caravans around his house and entering his property and that "his wife of 40 years" has been getting threats over her mobile phone.

"It has to stop," he added.

Sterling said he decided to speak out after he learned about a series of threats against a 20-year-old contractor -- including photos of a noose with his name on it -- in response to a video of him working with a piece of election equipment. The video has been widely circulated this week by Trump backers as proof of fraud, which it's not, Sterling said.

"This kid took a job. He just took a job," Sterling said during a news conference on Tuesday in Atlanta to provide an update on the progress of a recount requested by Trump. "I can't begin to explain the level of anger I have right now over this. And every American, every Georgian, Republican and Democrat alike, should have that same level of anger."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on December 01, 2020, 07:03:10 PM
I could link to the Washington Post article they quote or the Politico article they quote, but this deserves to be delivered Wonkette style:

and quoting (almost) in full:

Republican Senators Say 'Mean Tweets' Disqualify Biden Nominees. Make Your Own Joke, We're Fresh Out. (https://www.wonkette.com/republican-senators-say-mean-tweets-disqualify-biden-nominees-make-your-own-joke-were-fresh-out)

"The Republicans don't want to confirm "partisan" nominees to positions in the Biden administration? Really? REALLY?

Republicans are currently having a tantrum over the news that President-elect Joe Biden is nominating Neera Tanden to head the Office of Management and Budget because she said mean stuff about them on Twitter.

"I think, in light of her combative and insulting comments about many members of the Senate, mainly on our side of the aisle, that it creates certainly a problematic path," Texas Sen. John Cornyn said, calling Tanden "radioactive" and Biden's "worst nominee so far." After four years of pretending not to see the president's latest incendiary tweets, Republicans sat down with Hooked on Phonics over the holiday weekend and are suddenly able to read. Hosanna! And boy howdy are they offended.

"She's been pretty partisan in some of her previous positions. And in many cases, with respect to Republican senators who would have to vote on her potential nomination," South Dakota's John Thune told Politico, while Ohio's Rob Portman, who once headed the OMB himself, tut-tutted, "Of all the jobs, that's one where I think you would need to be careful not to have someone who's overtly partisan."

Russ Vought, the current head of OMB, was confirmed by a Republican Senate despite having said in 2016 that "Muslims do not simply have a deficient theology. They do not know God because they have rejected Jesus Christ his Son, and they stand condemned."

He was preceded in the position by Mick Mulvaney, a founding member of the Freedom Caucus. The same Mick Mulvaney who once described Social Security as a Ponzi scheme. The same Mick Mulvaney who accused Planned Parenthood of "trafficking in pieces of dead children." The same Mick Mulvaney who came before the American people and announced that the government had looked and looked, and the only place they could find to host the G-7 meeting was at Trump's Doral hotel. The same Mick Mulvaney who used his position to put a hold on congressionally allocated defense funds for Ukraine — you may remember something about that? — because the president was trying to squeeze that country into investigating Joe Biden.

And while we're on the subject of partisan nominees, let's talk about John Ratcliffe, the current Director of National Intelligence. Ratcliffe, who used his position on the House Intelligence Committee to run interference for Trump during the impeachment, accused Democrats of fabricating evidence in the Russia investigation, and publicly mischaracterized former DOJ employee Lisa Page's testimony about the Hillary Clinton email investigation. Ratcliffe's first nomination to DNI was scuttled after it emerged that he'd lied on his resume. The Senate only confirmed him, despite his lack of legally mandated qualifications, because otherwise Trump was going to keep that nasty Twitter troll Ric Grenell in the position indefinitely.

Grenell, perhaps the least diplomatic person alive, was confirmed 56-41 as ambassador to Germany, where he immediately set about offending one of our staunchest allies.

Mike Pompeo, who led the Benghazi hearings to prove that Hillary Clinton was somehow responsible for an attack on an embassy halfway around the world, sailed through his confirmation to head the CIA and later as secretary of State. The same Republican Senate that sat on Merrick Garland's nomination for a year was happy to bless the elevation of various purse designers, coal magnates, dermatologists, and rich donors to represent our country abroad.

Leave aside the fact that these assholes had zero problem with Trump withholding his tax returns. Forget even that the president's son-in-law, whose portfolio includes "everything," had such skeevy secrets he couldn't get a security clearance without a shove from the president.

We've got a coal lobbyist running the EPA, an oil lobbyist as Interior secretary, a corporate lobbyist running the Department of Labor, a Transportation secretary whose family runs a shipping company, a lawyer for the steel industry as the US Trade Representative, a Commerce secretary who still hasn't managed to divest himself of all his various business interests, an Energy secretary who represented an automobile trade association, and we'd still have a former Raytheon lobbyist at Defense if Trump could manage to keep help for more than five minutes.

And while we're on the topic, Republicans didn't give a rat's ass if Trump used "acting" staffers to indefinitely evade the Senate's right to vote on nominees to top jobs.

It doesn't make a damn bit of difference who Biden nominates. The GOP is already announcing its plans to obstruct the incoming administration at every turn — albeit usually less idiotically than Josh Hawley.

Senate Republicans manifestly do not care about conflicts of interest or partisanship or actual qualifications for the job. Neera Tanden is a qualified labor economist who called them names, and now they're going to sulk and play the victim. Third verse, same as the first."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 01, 2020, 07:09:52 PM
Someone on Twitter speculated, if Trump pardons the turkey, is he only pardoning the white meat?
And I thought, well, what did the dark meat ever do for HIM?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 01, 2020, 07:16:06 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on December 01, 2020, 07:03:10 PM
I could link to the Washington Post article they quote or the Politico article they quote, but this deserves to be delivered Wonkette style:

and quoting (almost) in full:

Republican Senators Say 'Mean Tweets' Disqualify Biden Nominees. Make Your Own Joke, We're Fresh Out. (https://www.wonkette.com/republican-senators-say-mean-tweets-disqualify-biden-nominees-make-your-own-joke-were-fresh-out)

"The Republicans don't want to confirm "partisan" nominees to positions in the Biden administration? Really? REALLY?

Republicans are currently having a tantrum over the news that President-elect Joe Biden is nominating Neera Tanden to head the Office of Management and Budget because she said mean stuff about them on Twitter.

"I think, in light of her combative and insulting comments about many members of the Senate, mainly on our side of the aisle, that it creates certainly a problematic path," Texas Sen. John Cornyn said, calling Tanden "radioactive" and Biden's "worst nominee so far." After four years of pretending not to see the president's latest incendiary tweets, Republicans sat down with Hooked on Phonics over the holiday weekend and are suddenly able to read. Hosanna! And boy howdy are they offended.

"She's been pretty partisan in some of her previous positions. And in many cases, with respect to Republican senators who would have to vote on her potential nomination," South Dakota's John Thune told Politico, while Ohio's Rob Portman, who once headed the OMB himself, tut-tutted, "Of all the jobs, that's one where I think you would need to be careful not to have someone who's overtly partisan."

Russ Vought, the current head of OMB, was confirmed by a Republican Senate despite having said in 2016 that "Muslims do not simply have a deficient theology. They do not know God because they have rejected Jesus Christ his Son, and they stand condemned."

He was preceded in the position by Mick Mulvaney, a founding member of the Freedom Caucus. The same Mick Mulvaney who once described Social Security as a Ponzi scheme. The same Mick Mulvaney who accused Planned Parenthood of "trafficking in pieces of dead children." The same Mick Mulvaney who came before the American people and announced that the government had looked and looked, and the only place they could find to host the G-7 meeting was at Trump's Doral hotel. The same Mick Mulvaney who used his position to put a hold on congressionally allocated defense funds for Ukraine — you may remember something about that? — because the president was trying to squeeze that country into investigating Joe Biden.

And while we're on the subject of partisan nominees, let's talk about John Ratcliffe, the current Director of National Intelligence. Ratcliffe, who used his position on the House Intelligence Committee to run interference for Trump during the impeachment, accused Democrats of fabricating evidence in the Russia investigation, and publicly mischaracterized former DOJ employee Lisa Page's testimony about the Hillary Clinton email investigation. Ratcliffe's first nomination to DNI was scuttled after it emerged that he'd lied on his resume. The Senate only confirmed him, despite his lack of legally mandated qualifications, because otherwise Trump was going to keep that nasty Twitter troll Ric Grenell in the position indefinitely.

Grenell, perhaps the least diplomatic person alive, was confirmed 56-41 as ambassador to Germany, where he immediately set about offending one of our staunchest allies.

Mike Pompeo, who led the Benghazi hearings to prove that Hillary Clinton was somehow responsible for an attack on an embassy halfway around the world, sailed through his confirmation to head the CIA and later as secretary of State. The same Republican Senate that sat on Merrick Garland's nomination for a year was happy to bless the elevation of various purse designers, coal magnates, dermatologists, and rich donors to represent our country abroad.

Leave aside the fact that these assholes had zero problem with Trump withholding his tax returns. Forget even that the president's son-in-law, whose portfolio includes "everything," had such skeevy secrets he couldn't get a security clearance without a shove from the president.

We've got a coal lobbyist running the EPA, an oil lobbyist as Interior secretary, a corporate lobbyist running the Department of Labor, a Transportation secretary whose family runs a shipping company, a lawyer for the steel industry as the US Trade Representative, a Commerce secretary who still hasn't managed to divest himself of all his various business interests, an Energy secretary who represented an automobile trade association, and we'd still have a former Raytheon lobbyist at Defense if Trump could manage to keep help for more than five minutes.

And while we're on the topic, Republicans didn't give a rat's ass if Trump used "acting" staffers to indefinitely evade the Senate's right to vote on nominees to top jobs.

It doesn't make a damn bit of difference who Biden nominates. The GOP is already announcing its plans to obstruct the incoming administration at every turn — albeit usually less idiotically than Josh Hawley.

Senate Republicans manifestly do not care about conflicts of interest or partisanship or actual qualifications for the job. Neera Tanden is a qualified labor economist who called them names, and now they're going to sulk and play the victim. Third verse, same as the first."

The fish rots from the head. Who makes/shares more mean Tweets than Cheeto Mussolini?

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/01/trump-considers-2024-campaign-kickoff-on-inauguration-day.html
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 02, 2020, 05:05:44 AM
A Teeny-Tiny Debt Sale Breathes Life Into Venezuela's Markets (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-12-02/a-teeny-tiny-debt-sale-breathes-life-into-venezuela-s-markets)

Progress?

OK, technically, this is about the Venezuelan economy and markets, but now gringo currency is all official like down there.  Why, I wonder, were the securities not issued in Euros? 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 02, 2020, 09:17:25 AM

     Barr is still with us, so everyone can relax for the time being. That has me wondering if there was more to the meeting than Trump raging at his traitorous AG. Might Barr have had his own message to deliver? Who says he's not the Keeper of Secrets? (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/akyhne/blank.gif)
     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 02, 2020, 10:06:58 AM
Quote from: drogulus on December 02, 2020, 09:17:25 AM
     Barr is still with us, so everyone can relax for the time being. That has me wondering if there was more to the meeting than Trump raging at his traitorous AG. Might Barr have had his own message to deliver? Who says he's not the Keeper of Secrets? (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/akyhne/blank.gif)
   

It's surely folly to micro-analyze the statements of massive liars, but FWIW (which is to say, squat):

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/02/white-house-refuses-to-say-trump-has-faith-in-william-barr.html

When she was asked if Trump has spoken to Barr since his interview with the AP, McEnany said, "I'm not aware if they've spoken."

"I know the attorney general was here yesterday for a pre-planned meeting with the chief of staff [Mark Meadows] and they discussed an array of issues but i'm not aware if the president has spoken to him directly," McEnany said.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on December 02, 2020, 10:47:30 AM
Quote from: Todd on December 02, 2020, 05:05:44 AM
A Teeny-Tiny Debt Sale Breathes Life Into Venezuela's Markets (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-12-02/a-teeny-tiny-debt-sale-breathes-life-into-venezuela-s-markets)

Progress?

OK, technically, this is about the Venezuelan economy and markets, but now gringo currency is all official like down there.  Why, I wonder, were the securities not issued in Euros?

Could it have to do with what was in use already in the black market?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 02, 2020, 10:49:21 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on December 02, 2020, 10:47:30 AM
Could it have to do with what was in use already in the black market?

I do not know.  Do you know?  If so, how?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 02, 2020, 11:32:01 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on December 02, 2020, 10:47:30 AM
Could it have to do with what was in use already in the black market?

     You're just wondering.

     I know the article says this:

The exchange in recent years has served mostly as a vehicle for Venezuelans to buy securities they hoped would protect against the almost daily depreciation in the local currency amid a staggering economic collapse.

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 03, 2020, 08:36:35 AM

     What's next for the Trump cult?

     (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/df/Marshall_Applewhite.jpg)

     George Conway tweets helpfully:

it's as though he's in the bunker, his days numbered, directing ministers to destroy bridges and factories, and ordering generals to attack with armies that no longer exist

     I know it looks like that. Money is on his mind, though, hundreds of millions that will end up being used to bail out the debt-ridden Trump empire and pay for acres of expensive lawyering.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on December 03, 2020, 09:38:03 AM
"... a patriotic pop-up book, now a collector's item ..."

https://twitter.com/trump_see/status/1334563474773602315

Psalm 91 ("Pslam 91"):
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm%2091&version=NIV
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on December 03, 2020, 01:23:32 PM
Not The Onion:

Roger Stone Says North Korean Boats Delivered Ballots Through Maine Harbor As Trump Boosts Fraud Claims (https://www.newsweek.com/roger-stone-says-north-korean-boats-delivered-ballots-through-maine-harbor-trump-boosts-fraud-1551937)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 03, 2020, 01:49:32 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on December 03, 2020, 01:23:32 PM
Not The Onion:

Roger Stone Says North Korean Boats Delivered Ballots Through Maine Harbor As Trump Boosts Fraud Claims (https://www.newsweek.com/roger-stone-says-north-korean-boats-delivered-ballots-through-maine-harbor-trump-boosts-fraud-1551937)


On one hand, this us idiocy which doesn't pass the sniff test.
On t'other, 46.9% of the US electorate lap up this whacko shite.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on December 03, 2020, 01:51:46 PM
And on the third hand, let me show you this globe, Roger, indicating the US ports closest to North Korea...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 03, 2020, 01:53:34 PM
Nope, absolutely no sign of the lame needle-pecker orange man trying to steal the election here:

Wisconsin Supreme Court declines to hear Trump campaign challenge to election results (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/wisconsin-supreme-court-trump-lawsuit/2020/12/03/ee481942-3596-11eb-a997-1f4c53d2a747_story.html)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 03, 2020, 01:54:32 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on December 03, 2020, 01:51:46 PM
And on the third hand, let me show you this globe, Roger, indicating the US ports closest to North Korea...

He knows the geographical literacy of his target audience ....
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on December 03, 2020, 02:15:05 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on December 03, 2020, 01:51:46 PM
And on the third hand, let me show you this globe, Roger, indicating the US ports closest to North Korea...

Globe? You think they're falling for that spherical earth BS? Not a chance.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 03, 2020, 02:26:58 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on December 03, 2020, 02:15:05 PM
Globe? You think they're falling for that spherical earth BS? Not a chance.

(* chortle *)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 03, 2020, 03:00:35 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 03, 2020, 01:49:32 PM

On one hand, this us idiocy which doesn't pass the sniff test.
On t'other, 46.9% of the US electorate lap up this whacko shite.

How many of the above (emphasis added) lappers up of whacko shite could locate North Korea on a map?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on December 03, 2020, 03:06:18 PM
I should stay away from this thread, but Giuliani farting is too funny to ignore.  :laugh:

https://www.youtube.com/v/f6l36qCnQ5E

Empire in decline...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 03, 2020, 03:10:10 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on December 03, 2020, 03:06:18 PM
I should stay way from this thread, but Giuliani farting is too funny to ignore.  :laugh:

Empire in decline...

Thanks for posting this! I'll refrain from further comment...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on December 03, 2020, 03:20:57 PM
Quote from: T. D. on December 03, 2020, 03:10:10 PM
Thanks for posting this!

You're welcome!  0:)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on December 04, 2020, 07:18:40 AM
That whole hearing was just a bizarre Jerry Springer-like spectacle, with this whacky woman talking over everybody all the time, and people applauding partisan points. A classic.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 04, 2020, 08:46:56 AM
Quote from: Herman on December 04, 2020, 07:18:40 AM
That whole hearing was just a bizarre Jerry Springer-like spectacle, with this whacky woman talking over everybody all the time, and people applauding partisan points. A classic.

     The exchange between SuperWitness and a perplexed Repub over the poll book will go down in history as far down as you can get.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on December 04, 2020, 09:42:59 AM
Quote from: drogulus on December 04, 2020, 08:46:56 AM
     The exchange between SuperWitness and a perplexed Repub over the poll book will go down in history as far down as you can get.

Still 45 days to go, so who knows?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on December 04, 2020, 09:49:26 AM
I predicted a year ago that 2020 will be completely insane in the US politics and it surely has been that, but for completely different way than what I predicted.  We did not get the total meltdown of the establishment because of Bernie Sanders' victory in the election, but we certainly get something else! The "clown coup" of the last month alone has been overhelming in it's lunacy.

Nearly half of Americans have lost their mind and are completely detached from reality. I'm not sure what at this point keeps the US from collapsing as a society. Perhaps the other half of Americans still having some touch to reality? Anyway it's a scary show. It is possible the US becomes a Russia-like totalitarian country in my lifetime and that is a scary thought! We can only hope millions of Americans will abandon the Trump cult and come to their senses, back to the real World with real facts, reason and logic.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on December 04, 2020, 09:52:04 AM
Quote from: Herman on December 04, 2020, 09:42:59 AM
Still 45 days to go, so who knows?

ALL THE CHINESE PEOPLE LOOK THE SAME!!! >:D

January 20 can't come soon enough.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on December 04, 2020, 10:45:21 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on December 04, 2020, 09:52:04 AM
ALL THE CHINESE PEOPLE LOOK THE SAME!!! >:D

January 20 can't come soon enough.

And mind you, the person who said this, prefaced it with saying that people told her all Indians (like her) looked the same. So it was a sort of stereotype double whammy.

Jan 20 won't change anything about these attitudes. Counter to what would seem logical, racism has gone up immensily since Obama won the presidency.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on December 04, 2020, 11:34:37 AM
An offer from Kellyanne Conway:
"... it looks like Joe Biden and Kamala Harris will prevail (...) If there's anything I can ever do to help ... they can count on me."
https://19thnews.org/2020/12/kellyanne-conway-acknowledges-it-looks-like-joe-biden-and-kamala-harris-will-prevail/

Michael Cohen: #45 just keeps going for the money; I voted Biden.
https://www.rawstory.com/2020/12/michael-cohen-reveals-the-endgame-of-trumps-post-election-hysterics-he-cant-go-back-to-real-estate/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on December 04, 2020, 11:36:36 AM
Quote from: Herman on December 04, 2020, 10:45:21 AM
Jan 20 won't change anything about these attitudes.

Unfortunately. You are right about that, but Jan. 20 at least restores some sanity to the White House. That's how low the par for the leaders of countries are these days. Sane person => GREAT!  :-\
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 04, 2020, 11:57:00 AM
Today's funny item from Insane Clown Posse redux:

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/04/sidney-powell-amends-court-filing-that-said-georgia-votes-were-flipped-to-trump.html

This nutjob lawyer makes Ghouliani look sane.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on December 04, 2020, 12:23:13 PM
Quote from: drogulus on December 04, 2020, 08:46:56 AM
     The exchange between SuperWitness and a perplexed Repub over the poll book will go down in history as far down as you can get.

And yet, if we look at how things have been going in the GOP this century, we can expect Blunt Melissa to be a national candidate in 2024.

And people will love her.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on December 04, 2020, 12:54:42 PM
Who is "Blunt Melissa"?

in attempting to google that I stumble across this from the Galveston County Daily News::

Tucker Carlson should be the GOP's choice for 2024 (https://www.galvnews.com/opinion/guest_columns/article_2ba8aea0-4763-57e6-940c-8db4e36584e9.html)


edit: listening to the latest episode of The New Abnormal podcast and guessing it must be this Melissa Carone they're mocking
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on December 04, 2020, 01:01:40 PM
........... it turns out that Melissa just got off probation for computer-related crimes:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-election-2020/giuliani-michigan-carone-computer-crime-b1766472.html


The truck driver witness makes money on ghost videos, claims ghosts follow his family:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-fraud-witness-also-believes-ghosts-are-haunting-his-family?source=twitter&via=desktop
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 04, 2020, 01:15:06 PM
Quote from: Herman on December 04, 2020, 12:23:13 PM
And yet, if we look at how things have been going in the GOP this century, we can expect Blunt Melissa to be a national candidate in 2024.

And people will love her.

     Rudy was the sober one. Imagine that.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 04, 2020, 01:19:52 PM
https://news.yahoo.com/trumps-lawyer-jenna-ellis-elite-195738771.html

How Is Trump's Lawyer Jenna Ellis 'Elite Strike Force' Material?
...
Ellis' work appears to largely be in a public relations capacity. The Trump campaign and its supporters have so far filed about 50 election-related lawsuits. She has not signed her name or appeared in court to argue a single one.

In a written statement responding to questions about her record, Ellis described herself as "a highly experienced and highly qualified attorney and expert in my field." Any assertions to the contrary "cast me in a false light," she said. The Trump campaign provided the name of one federal case in which it said Ellis had participated, in 2012, when she was a year out of law school. But her name is not among the lawyers listed in the decision, and the case was not heard in a regular federal court, but rather in an administrative tribunal.

...


Well, she doesn't fart on video and her hair dye doesn't melt.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 04, 2020, 01:24:22 PM
https://news.yahoo.com/republican-lawmaker-likens-trump-votefraud-crusade-to-the-search-for-bigfoot-130019525.html
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on December 04, 2020, 03:07:51 PM
Quote from: MusicTurner on December 04, 2020, 01:01:40 PM
........... it turns out that Melissa just got off probation for computer-related crimes:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-election-2020/giuliani-michigan-carone-computer-crime-b1766472.html
I didn't see her testimony, but looking at the article, I'm a bit confused:

"According to the Mail, Ms Carone, 33, was sentenced last September to 12 months of probation for an as-yet-unreported incident in 2018, which court documents refer to as 'disorderly circumstances warranting alarm" and "computers-using to commit a crime.'"

I guess that I would have thought that if she had already been put on probation, that the incident would have been on the record (unless possibly due to age?)?

PD

p.s.  I just heard on one program this:  "In 2018, Carone was charged with obscenity for allegedly emailing sexually explicit videos to her boyfriend's ex. She pleaded guilty to a lesser charge, which was dismissed after she served probation."  The quote is from MSN news.  I just heard it on another program.

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on December 04, 2020, 04:26:25 PM
Quote from: drogulus on December 04, 2020, 01:15:06 PM
     Rudy was the sober one. Imagine that.

Sober?  No, I suspect Rudy took the lady out for a friendly drink or two ... or three ... before the session, and it did not occur to him what effect such an unexceptional amount of alcohol -- for Rudy -- might have on a normal person.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on December 04, 2020, 04:51:09 PM
Quote from: MusicTurner on December 04, 2020, 01:01:40 PM
The truck driver witness makes money on ghost videos, claims ghosts follow his family:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-fraud-witness-also-believes-ghosts-are-haunting-his-family?source=twitter&via=desktop

What if Biden got paranormal votes from ghosts? Dead people voted they say...  :P
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on December 05, 2020, 12:43:15 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on December 04, 2020, 01:01:40 PM
........... it turns out that Melissa just got off probation for computer-related crimes:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-election-2020/giuliani-michigan-carone-computer-crime-b1766472.html


In Florida there has been a huge effort to give felons the right to vote. So in itself a felony should not disqualify a person from testifying. However, one could not help but notice that MI Republicans rejected the proposal to have Mellissa and her fellow witnesses testify under oath, so as not to to hinder the bullshit and fart festival that ensued.

It's been clear for a while that Trump and Giuliani are scraping the bottom of the barrel now.

It's not nice to say so, perhaps, but Jenna Ellis' most conspicuous qualifications are, not necessarily in that order, that she looks good on camera (do note the liberal doses of shadow under her cheek bones for a somewhat sexier look) and is well in the religious corner (like so many late stage Trump cronies). Like so many of these people Trump spotted her on tv.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on December 05, 2020, 01:20:31 AM
Slate's Lili Loofburow has a nice analysis about the all-American type of crank Mellissa C. embodies, and why it's wrong to dismiss them as crazy. (I couldn't help but admire the way Kimmel spotted Mellissa's interesting phonetics in e.g. "threat ened", though.)

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/12/melissa-carone-michigan-testimony-not-funny.html

"Cranks matter now. They are being given seats at the table, not just as witnesses but as officials. The president is a crank. So is his team, which is trying to overthrow the results of the election. Sidney Powell is a crank. Rudy Giuliani is a crank. QAnon cranks have been elected to Congress. If Donald Trump has proven anything, it's that a massive number of Americans don't have a "bridge too far" when it comes to crankish excesses we still somehow think the public will find disqualifying."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on December 05, 2020, 02:10:45 AM
Well, we can't exactly build a wall to the US over here, but one of the options is the talk & vague progressions in making the largely free-wheelin' social media more responsible for their content. EU seems to be gradually moving towards it. It's a complicated question, but IMO the social media are comparable to traditional/printed media & they certainly ought to have - and show - more responsibility in their actions.

Newsmax and OANN are likely to become the upcoming, fringe media sources, and they'll nourish division and conspiracy theories further, now that Fox News has retreated somewhat - at least for a while. Add to this 'DeepFake' possibilities in the new stories, which will contribute further to confusion in obtaining reliable information in politics and current events, and you'll have a rather problematic cocktail, for everyone, in the future.

One could also hope that the social media use, still in its early phase, will mature somewhat, rather than degenerate - and that a better educational level regarding them will follow as well, in the long run. But it's all intertwined with the general democratic sense, and the sense of civic responsibility, versus the degree of social and economical divisions within society.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 05, 2020, 04:44:13 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on December 04, 2020, 09:49:26 AMNearly half of Americans have lost their mind and are completely detached from reality.

A lot of non-Americans have as well.

Quote from: 71 dB on December 04, 2020, 09:49:26 AMI'm not sure what at this point keeps the US from collapsing as a society.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: steve ridgway on December 05, 2020, 07:10:39 AM
Well a man called Adolf Hitler Uunona has been elected as a local councillor for Namibia's governing Swapo party. ???

(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/live-experience/cps/624/cpsprodpb/vivo/live/images/2020/12/3/88a7530f-5d3a-4f55-83e1-b3032a55922d.jpg)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 05, 2020, 07:12:19 AM
Quote from: steve ridgway on December 05, 2020, 07:10:39 AM
Well a man called Adolf Hitler Uunona has been elected as a local councillor for Namibia's governing Swapo party. ???

(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/live-experience/cps/624/cpsprodpb/vivo/live/images/2020/12/3/88a7530f-5d3a-4f55-83e1-b3032a55922d.jpg)

Old news: https://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,6347.msg1335376.html#msg1335376
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 05, 2020, 07:15:16 AM
Post-election political estrangement has landed U.S. at 'tipping point,' warns world's biggest hedge-fund manager (https://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-u-s-is-at-a-tipping-point-that-could-lead-to-civil-warn-warns-the-worlds-biggest-hedge-fund-manager-11606922363)

Old Ray must be engineering a dollar play.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 07:17:07 AM
Quote from: steve ridgway on December 05, 2020, 07:10:39 AM
Well a man called Adolf Hitler Uunona has been elected as a local councillor for Namibia's governing Swapo party. ???

(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/live-experience/cps/624/cpsprodpb/vivo/live/images/2020/12/3/88a7530f-5d3a-4f55-83e1-b3032a55922d.jpg)

And what's got it to do with USA politics, I wonder.  ???
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 05, 2020, 07:17:40 AM
Quote from: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 07:17:07 AM
And what's got it to do with USA politics, I wonder.  ???

The internet.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: steve ridgway on December 05, 2020, 07:23:14 AM
Quote from: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 07:17:07 AM
And what's got it to do with USA politics, I wonder.  ???

Todd's comment about non-Americans losing their minds too. I was just thinking what fun could be had if some party in America could falsify his birth records and run him for president. >:D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 05, 2020, 07:30:24 AM
Something that may be of help to some people: Reading Too Much Political News Is Bad for Your Well-Being (https://www.theatlantic.com/family/archive/2020/10/reading-too-much-political-news-bad-happiness/616651/)

It's from The Atlantic, so it's legit, even if it was pre-election.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: steve ridgway on December 05, 2020, 07:36:42 AM
Quote from: Todd on December 05, 2020, 07:30:24 AM
Something that may be of help to some people: Reading Too Much Political News Is Bad for Your Well-Being (https://www.theatlantic.com/family/archive/2020/10/reading-too-much-political-news-bad-happiness/616651/)

Brilliant - I have a signature again. ;D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 07:41:23 AM
Quote from: steve ridgway on December 05, 2020, 07:23:14 AM
Todd's comment about non-Americans losing their minds too.

I see, thanks for clarifying.  :)

Well, beside the name there is another striking similarity: SWAPO is a leftist party and so was the NSDAP, so I'd say there is very serious reason for the whole Africa to be deeply concerned about it.  ;D

Seriously now, the chap might be a jolly good fellow who really cares about his community and does his best to improve it in every possible way (that's  one of the typical reasons why local councilors get elected); alternately, he might be just a faithful, and obedient rank-and-file of the ruling party (that's another typical reason why local councilors get elected). Either way, he can't be blamed for the name his parents gave him. Besides, Mussolini's anarchist father named him after Benito Suarez.  :D

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 07:44:19 AM
Quote from: Todd on December 05, 2020, 07:30:24 AM
Reading Too Much Political News Is Bad for Your Well-Being

Of course it is. We have a conspicuous example right here on GMG.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 05, 2020, 07:47:25 AM
Quote from: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 07:44:19 AM
Of course it is. We have a conspicuous examples right here on GMG.


Edited.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: steve ridgway on December 05, 2020, 07:54:45 AM
Quote from: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 07:41:23 AM
Seriously now, the chap might be a jolly good fellow who really cares about his community and does his best to improve it in every possible way (that's  one of the typical reasons why local councilors get elected); alternately, he might be just a faithful, and obedient rank-and-file of the ruling party (that's another typical reason why local councilors get elected). Either way, he can't be blamed for the name his parents gave him.

Yes, it could be a name given out of innocent backwater ignorance. As the BBC say,

Namibia is a former German colony and there are still reminders of that time in some placenames. There is also a small German-speaking minority.

"My father named me after this man. He probably didn't understand what Adolf Hitler stood for," Mr Uunona told Bild.

"It was a very normal name for me as a child. It was not until I was growing up that I realised that this man wanted to subjugate the whole world. I have nothing to do with any of these things."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: steve ridgway on December 05, 2020, 07:56:54 AM
Which reminds me of my father's surprise when my brother's Hungarian wife told him Atilla was a very popular name over there. :o
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 08:02:31 AM
Quote from: steve ridgway on December 05, 2020, 07:54:45 AM
"My father named me after this man. He probably didn't understand what Adolf Hitler stood for," Mr Uunona told Bild.

"It was a very normal name for me as a child. It was not until I was growing up that I realised that this man wanted to subjugate the whole world. I have nothing to do with any of these things."[/i]

He sounds okay to me.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 08:08:45 AM
Quote from: steve ridgway on December 05, 2020, 07:56:54 AM
Which reminds me of my father's surprise when my brother's Hungarian wife told him Atilla was a very popular name over there. :o

And of course the irony for both Hungarians and Englishmen is that Attila is a Germanic name meaning "little father" which stems from atta (father) to which the diminutive suffix -ila was attached. Exactly the same as Wulfila, ie "little wolf". 

:D



Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: steve ridgway on December 05, 2020, 08:09:47 AM
Quote from: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 08:02:31 AM
He sounds okay to me.

There are actually some descendants of Hitler living in.... the USA. ::)

https://nypost.com/2018/10/08/some-of-hitlers-last-relatives-are-living-secret-lives-on-long-island/ (https://nypost.com/2018/10/08/some-of-hitlers-last-relatives-are-living-secret-lives-on-long-island/)

I also found a Hitler in the corporate email address book of a previous employer - again in the USA. ;)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: steve ridgway on December 05, 2020, 08:11:06 AM
Quote from: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 08:08:45 AM
And of course the irony for both Hungarians and Englishmen is that Attila is a Germanic name meaning "little father" which stems from atta (father) to which the diminutive suffix -ila was attached. Exactly the same as Wulfila, ie "little wolf".

Ah right, we English people would never have known about that. :-[
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 08:16:40 AM
Quote from: steve ridgway on December 05, 2020, 08:11:06 AM
Ah right, we English people would never have known about that. :-[

I didn't mean to be pedantic or offensive. If I sounded like that I apologize.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 08:21:30 AM
Quote from: Todd on December 05, 2020, 08:14:39 AM
More Hitler, please. 

Anyone remember the (in)famous Carlos the Jackal? He was born Ilyich Sanchez and had two brothers: Vladimir Sanchez and Lenin Sanchez.

Truly politics is bad for people's mental health. Music, on the other hand, produces Mozart Guarneri and his brothers Verdi Guarneri and Rossini Guarneri.  :D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on December 05, 2020, 08:33:54 AM
Quote from: steve ridgway on December 05, 2020, 07:54:45 AM
Yes, it could be a name given out of innocent backwater ignorance. As the BBC say,

Namibia is a former German colony and there are still reminders of that time in some placenames. There is also a small German-speaking minority.

"My father named me after this man. He probably didn't understand what Adolf Hitler stood for," Mr Uunona told Bild.

"It was a very normal name for me as a child. It was not until I was growing up that I realised that this man wanted to subjugate the whole world. I have nothing to do with any of these things."


My paternal grandfather was an army officer and got a medal of honour from Hitler.  :P My name is the same as my grandfather's name. My name is extremely rare. Only I and my grandfather had it. I never met him, because he passed away very young over a decade before I was born.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 08:38:12 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on December 05, 2020, 08:33:54 AM
My father's father was an army officer and got a medal of honour from Hitler.  :P My name is the same as my father's father's name. My name is extremely rare. Only I and my father's father had it. I never met him, because he passed away very young over a decade before I was born.

Why didn't you write "my grandfather", just as everybody else would have written?  ???

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on December 05, 2020, 08:40:55 AM
Quote from: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 08:38:12 AM
Why didn't you write "my grandfather", just as everybody else would have written?  ???

Instead of the Hitler connection people are shocked by my crappy grammar? I like father's father because it tells he is not from my mothers side (mother's father).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 08:45:31 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on December 05, 2020, 08:40:55 AM
Instead of the Hitler connection people are shocked by my crappy grammar? I like father's father because it tells he is not from my mothers side (mother's father).

Paternal grandfather, then.  ;)

And why would I be shocked by your paternal grandfather's being decorated by Hitler? King Michael of Romania was decorated by Stalin.  ;D

Bravery is bravery, regardless of who acknowledges it. I greatly admire Finland and Marshall President Mannerheim for their courage and determination to fight the Soviet aggression.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 05, 2020, 08:48:47 AM

     There are people who are harmed by an obsessive preoccupation with sports, too. Whether it's nature or nurture, I can't say. Most of us are unharmed by it. I'm happy if my interests only harm others. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/smiley.gif)

     I'll try to be serious, for now. My understanding of fascism is behavioral more than spectral. The left/right distinctions that can apply to democrats, rule of law and constitutional factions don't fit Mussolini or Hitler. They attack the democratic order with its own tools and combine programmatic elements from both the left and right.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on December 05, 2020, 08:51:20 AM
Quote from: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 08:45:31 AM
Paternal grandfather, then.  ;)

Okay, thanks. I'll adopt that terminology. ;)

Quote from: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 08:45:31 AMAnd why would I be shocked by your paternal grandfather's being decorated by Hitler? King Michael of Romania was decorated by Stalin.  ;D

Bravery is bravery, regardless of who acknowledges it. I greatly admire Finland and Marshall President Mannerheim for their courage and determination to fight the Soviet aggression.

It's your own business what shocks you. People get shocked for whatever reason and the name Hitler has been an effective way to shock for historical reason. I'm glad if people are not shocked. I don't need to "hide" my paternal grandfather.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 08:55:40 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on December 05, 2020, 08:51:20 AM
It's your own business what shocks you. People get shocked for whatever reason and the name Hitler has been an effective way to shock for historical reason. I'm glad if people are not shocked. I don't need to "hide" my paternal grandfather.

|You got me completely wrong. If anything, my post was absolutely against "hiding" your paternal grandfather. He bravely fought for his country and I respectfully bow to his memory.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 08:59:25 AM
Quote from: drogulus on December 05, 2020, 08:48:47 AM
    My understanding of fascism is behavioral more than spectral. The left/right distinctions that can apply to democrats, rule of law and constitutional factions don't fit Mussolini or Hitler. They attack the democratic order with its own tools and combine programmatic elements from both the left and right.

You recently posted a link in which several professors were asked whether Trump is a fascist. Every single one of them answered "no". Why do you still keep flogging this dead horse?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: steve ridgway on December 05, 2020, 09:14:59 AM
Quote from: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 08:16:40 AM
I didn't mean to be pedantic or offensive. If I sounded like that I apologize.

No it didn't sound like that. I don't identify as English to the point I can't laugh at them.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 09:26:49 AM
Quote from: steve ridgway on December 05, 2020, 09:14:59 AM
No it didn't sound like that. I don't identify as English to the point I can't laugh at them.

I am relieved.  :-*
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 05, 2020, 10:06:48 AM
     
Quote from: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 08:59:25 AM
You recently posted a link in which several professors were asked whether Trump is a fascist. Every single one of them answered "no". Why do you still keep flogging this dead horse?

     It's not dead until I kill it. What Trump may not quite be doesn't tell you what he quite is. That's the question I'm exploring. The experts who were queried indicated that there's a wider group of authoritarians who attack lawful democratic orders that don't tick all the fascist boxes as we know them from history. I have mentioned this before.

     If scholars of authoritarianism are interested in how Trump fits, I'm not surprised. They showed little interest in claims that conservatives are really fascists, and that too is not surprising. I think you are incurious about actual living horses.

     For the curious, here's an alternative view that has merit:

     "Almost the Complete Opposite of Fascism" (https://jewishcurrents.org/almost-the-complete-opposite-of-fascism/)

DK: The historian Timothy Snyder, among other prominent public intellectuals, has argued that Trump's approach to the presidency resembles that of 20th-century dictators like Hitler or Mussolini. The obvious counter is that Trump is going to submit to the election result, but are people like Snyder completely off-base? Trump may be lazy and incompetent, and US institutions may be stronger than some predicted, but is it fair to characterize Trump and his hardcore supporters as far-right, illiberal, even fascist, and at the very least a test of how much strain the Constitution can endure?

CR: There is no question, in my mind, that Trump and his supporters are far-right and illiberal. I've said so from the beginning. One of my differences with Snyder and people who subscribe to the view that Trump is a fascist or authoritarian is that their desire to call Trump that often arises from a failure to understand conservatism more generally, which has always been a far-right and illiberal and anti-liberal form of politics. Many of the attributes people decry in Trump and his followers were primary features of the conservatism I was describing in The Reactionary Mind (and got a lot of flak from liberals for so describing). To my mind, the comparisons between Trump and Hitler or Mussolini come from people who only began thinking about American conservatism and the Republican Party when Trump came along.


     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on December 05, 2020, 10:15:39 AM
Quote from: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 08:55:40 AM
|You got me completely wrong. If anything, my post was absolutely against "hiding" your paternal grandfather. He bravely fought for his country and I respectfully bow to his memory.

I doubt he "fought" that much as an officer, but I'm sure he did his job well as a part of the chain of command.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on December 05, 2020, 10:18:19 AM
Quote from: Todd on December 05, 2020, 07:30:24 AM
Something that may be of help to some people: Reading Too Much Political News Is Bad for Your Well-Being (https://www.theatlantic.com/family/archive/2020/10/reading-too-much-political-news-bad-happiness/616651/)

After the last 4 years I am ready to agree.

However, I think total ignorance of politics is also bad.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 11:00:04 AM
Quote from: drogulus on December 05, 2020, 10:06:48 AM
     
     It's not dead until I kill it.

By all means, carry on.

QuoteWhat Trump may not quite be doesn't tell you what he quite is.

Trump is a former USA President.

QuoteThat's the question I'm exploring.

By all means, carry on.



Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 11:02:13 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on December 05, 2020, 10:15:39 AM
I doubt he "fought" that much as an officer

Do you think Hitler decorated him for nothing?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 05, 2020, 11:09:12 AM
Quote from: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 11:00:04 AMTrump is a former USA President.


Not until 12:00 PM on January 20, 2021.  Before then, he can do much good.  Like this:

Trump orders most US troops out of Somalia (https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-orders-us-troops-somalia/story?id=74546220)

No doubt, some warmongers will reel at the mere notion of such US troop drawdowns.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 11:59:35 AM
Quote from: drogulus on December 05, 2020, 10:06:48 AM
     
     "Almost the Complete Opposite of Fascism" (https://jewishcurrents.org/almost-the-complete-opposite-of-fascism/)



Prof. Corey Robin makes lots of salient points and a few stupid ones (the most blatant of the latter being to imply that the French Revolution was about "the democratic emancipation of the commoner"). Bottom line, his conclusion is that Trump is not a fascist.

By all means, though, keep exploring the idea, and keep keeping the dead horse alive.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: ritter on December 05, 2020, 12:12:12 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 11:59:35 AM
Prof. Corey Robin makes lots of salient points and a few stupid ones (the most blatant of the latter being to imply that the French Revolution was about "the democratic emancipation of the commoner"). Bottom line, his conclusion is that Trump is not a fascist.

By all means, though, keep exploring the idea, and keep keeping the dead horse alive.
Hasn't it occurred to you that many of Mr. Trump's actions and, most particularly, statements do show a clearly authoritarian and anti-democratic, if not openly  fascist, strain, and that it is—as should be expected—the strength of the US institutions that has prevented this from taking a, let's say, sourer turn?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 12:32:14 PM
Quote from: ritter on December 05, 2020, 12:12:12 PM
Hasn't it occurred to you that many of Mr. Trump's actions and, most particularly, statements do show a clearly authoritarian and anti-democratic, if not openly  fascist, strain,

Honestly, my friend, no, it hasn't.

Re: his actions --- I'd like to be shown which of his actions were either unconstitutional according to the US Constitution, or broke the US statutory laws.

Re: his statements --- he is a foulmouthed idiot, but it takes much, much, much more than that to make a fascist.

Quoteit is—as should be expected—the strength of the US institutions that has prevented this from taking a, let's say, a sourer turn?

I cannot read minds, and neither can you --- but I'm willing to bet he never ever contemplated taking a sourer turn. He took his chances within the US constitutional and legal frame --- and lost. Heck, can you imagine Mussolini or Hitler holding free elections and challenging their unfavorable results in courts? No, really, ponder just this for a second: holding free elections and then challenging the results in courts and losing --- can you imagine anything more opposite to fascism? I can't, honestly.


Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: ritter on December 05, 2020, 12:58:05 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 12:32:14 PM
Honestly, my friend, no, it hasn't.

Re: his actions --- I'd like to be shown which of his actions were either unconstitutional according to the US Constitution, or broke the US statutory laws.

Re: his statements --- he is a foulmouthed idiot, but it takes much, much, much more than that to make a fascist.

I cannot read minds, and neither can you --- but I'm willing to bet he never ever contemplated taking a sourer turn. He took his chances within the US constitutional and legal frame --- and lost. Heck, can you imagine Mussolini or Hitler holding free elections and challenging their unfavorable results in courts? No, really, ponder just this for a second: holding free elections and then challenging the results in courts and losing --- can you imagine anything more opposite to fascism? I can't, honestly.
Bueno, my friend. A President who, just to use the most recent examples, says that his opponent "can only become President if he can prove he hasn't won fraudulently" (thus reversing the burden of proof), who refuses to accept the outcome of an election—even when none of his legal challenges have prospered—, sowing doubt among a good chunk of the population on the institutions he is supposed to uphold, and who asks "what kind of judiciary is this?" when things don't go as he wants, is no true democrat in my book, and clearly shows authoritarian traits.

His demonisation of some groups (Mexicans are "rapists and drug smugglers", Muslims are "terrorists", etc.), and his—not so veiled—apology of the use of force ("stand back and stand by") is, at the very least, proto-fascist, I'm sorry to inform you. That this kind of attitudes cannot prosper in a democracy as strong as the American does not mean that the man who parades them is a not what he seems intent in showing us he is.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 05, 2020, 01:07:58 PM
Quote from: ritter on December 05, 2020, 12:58:05 PMwho refuses to accept the outcome of an election


There is no Constitutional or other legal requirement for Trump to accept the outcome of the election.  He will leave office on January 20, 2021 whether he accepts the outcome or not.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 01:16:48 PM
Quote from: ritter on December 05, 2020, 12:58:05 PM
authoritarian traits.

He is authoritarian, no doubt about it. But if mere authoritarianism does a fascist make, then Napoleon I, Napoleon III and Charles de Gaulle were all fascists --- to keep things French.  ;D

QuoteHis demonisation of some groups (Mexicans are "rapists and drug smugglers", Muslims are "terrorists", etc.), and his—not so veiled—apology of the use of force ("stand back and stand by") is, at the very least, proto-fascist, I'm sorry to inform you.

Oh, really? Just a few years ago, the electoral slogan of the Romanian Social-Democratic Party was "Proud to be Romanian!" and they lost no opportunity to denounce the EU as colonists and exploiters of the Romanian people, and the staunchly pro-EU opposition as enemies and traitors of the Romanian people. Were they fascists? Not at all, they just employed age-old verified electoral tactics: anything goes as long as we get elected.

But let's get back to the point: can you please show me which of Trump's actions were unconstitutional, or breaking the US statutory laws?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 05, 2020, 01:17:53 PM
Quote from: ritter on December 05, 2020, 12:12:12 PM
Hasn't it occurred to you that many of Mr. Trump's actions and, most particularly, statements do show a clearly authoritarian and anti-democratic, if not openly  fascist, strain, and that it is—as should be expected—the strength of the US institutions that has prevented this from taking a, let's say, sourer turn?

     All horses are dead, we live under a nothing new sun, and life is opinion. Any questions?

     
Quote from: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 11:00:04 AM

Trump is a former USA President.


     Not according to you. You have insisted Trump is not a fascist. The argument for that position can't be that he's a president, chancellor or prime minister who was born in Queens County, N.Y.

     If there are good arguments that Trump is not a fascist (hint: there are) you don't seem to be aware of them, or why serious scholars ponder them.

     That said, carry on.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 01:18:44 PM
Quote from: Todd on December 05, 2020, 01:07:58 PM
There is no Constitutional or other legal requirement for Trump to accept the outcome of the election.  He will leave office on January 20, 2021 whether he accepts the outcome or not.

Doesn't matter. He's a fascist, period.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: ritter on December 05, 2020, 01:20:42 PM
Quote from: Todd on December 05, 2020, 01:07:58 PM

There is no Constitutional or other legal requirement for Trump to accept the outcome of the election.  He will leave office on January 20, 2021 whether he accepts the outcome or not.
Exactly. But that reflects the greatness of America and its democracy, not the democratic convictions of the current President (whose behaviour would lead one to think  they are shaky, to put it mildly).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 01:25:20 PM
Quote from: drogulus on December 05, 2020, 01:17:53 PM
     All horses are dead, we live under a nothing new sun, and life is opinion. Any questions?

Yes, I have one: why do you still keep flogging dead horses?

     
Quote
     Not according to you.

I did not vote. The American people did, and according to them Trump is a former USA President.

By all means, carry on exploring what I would have voted were I Anerican.

Quote from: drogulus on December 05, 2020, 01:17:53 PM
    You have insisted Trump is not a fascist.

If my reckoning is correct, you linked to eight American professors that claim Trump is not a fascist. By all means, keep those links coming.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: ritter on December 05, 2020, 01:26:40 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 01:18:44 PM
Doesn't matter. He's a fascist, period.
No hay más sordo que el que no quiere oír.

Andrei, you seem to think that because the American institutions are strong enough to make Mr. Trump's  behaviour and utterances irrelevant, and prevent what in many other countries would have degenerated into a grave political crisis, he is not behaving as he is, and that his behaviour is not that of an authoritarian and undemocratic personality.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 01:32:00 PM
Quote from: ritter on December 05, 2020, 01:26:40 PM
No hay más sordo que el que no quiere oír.

How about No hay más ciego que el que no quiere ver?

QuoteAndrei, you seem to think that because the American institutions are strong enough to make Mr. Trump's  behaviour and utterances irrelevant, and prevent what in many other countries would have degenerated into a grave political crisis, he is not behaving as he is, and that his behaviour is not that of an authoritarian and undemocratic personality.

|I ask time and again: who was the first POTUS denounced by his opponents as being authoritarian and undemocratic?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 05, 2020, 01:35:16 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 01:16:48 PM
He is authoritarian, no doubt about it. But if mere authoritarianism does a fascist make, then Napoleon I, Napoleon III and Charles de Gaulle were all fascists --- to keep things French.  ;D



     OK, let's subject them to the same criteria that gave us a non-fascist authoritarian Trump in the view of horse fancying historians.

     You can't kill a horse with a dirty look. The history of the 20th century is still a live subject, and Trump will feature bigly in future histories. The questions explored in them will be of the kind we are exploring now.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 01:39:23 PM
Quote from: drogulus on December 05, 2020, 01:35:16 PM
let's

Let's not, really. Enough is enough.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 05, 2020, 01:42:12 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 01:25:20 PM


If my reckoning is correct, you linked to eight American professors that claim Trump is not a fascist. By all means, keep those links coming.

     Of course I did. I take the question seriously, which means examining the arguments made by scholars who take it as seriously as I do.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 01:44:55 PM
Quote from: drogulus on December 05, 2020, 01:42:12 PM
     Of course I did. I take the question seriously, which means examining the arguments made by scholars who take it as seriously as I do.

Fine. By now it's Scholars 8 - drogulus 0. How much do you need to concede defeat? 13 - 0? 27 - 0? 147 - 0? Maybe a challenge in court?  ;D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: ritter on December 05, 2020, 01:46:27 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 01:32:00 PM
...
|I ask time and again: who was the first POTUS denounced by his opponents as being authoritarian and undemocratic?
TBH, I don't care, and I'm no "opponent" of Mr. Trump. How could I be? I'm just a person commenting on what I see now and expressing my views, which—whatever some here on GMG may believe—I'm perfectly entitled to do.

Un abrazo,

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 01:50:07 PM
Quote from: ritter on December 05, 2020, 01:46:27 PM
TBH, I don't care,

You are entitled to not care, just as I am entitled to consider it a crucial issue.

QuoteI'm just a person commenting on what I see and expressing my views, which—whatever some here on GMG may believe—I'm perfectly entitled to do.

So am I, my dear friend, so am I.

QuoteUn abrazo,

Likewise.  :-*
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 05, 2020, 02:11:05 PM
Quote from: ritter on December 05, 2020, 01:20:42 PMExactly. But that reflects the greatness of America and its democracy, not the democratic convictions of the current President

Yes.

Quote from: ritter on December 05, 2020, 01:20:42 PM(whose behaviour would lead one to think  they are shaky, to put it mildly).

No.

Quote from: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 01:18:44 PM
Doesn't matter. He's a fascist, period.

I keep forgetting.  Good thing GMG exists to remind me.  If it is written on GMG, it is fact.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on December 05, 2020, 02:15:43 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 01:16:48 PM
He is authoritarian, no doubt about it. But if mere authoritarianism does a fascist make, then Napoleon I, Napoleon III and Charles de Gaulle were all fascists --- to keep things French.  ;D

I think a more important point is that if one is looking to political philosophy for insight into Trump's actions and leadership style then ones ferret is down the wrong hole, as they say. Habitual patterns of criminality and personality disorders are more fruitful places to look.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 05, 2020, 02:19:53 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on December 05, 2020, 02:15:43 PMpersonality disorders


What documented personality disorders, as diagnosed by clinical psychologists or psychiatrists who have met with Trump, have been disclosed?  As far as I am aware, claims of personality disorders are gossip only. 

As to criminality, well, let's just see what 2021 actually brings.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 02:27:29 PM
Quote from: Todd on December 05, 2020, 02:19:53 PM
What documented personality disorders, as diagnosed by clinical psychologists or psychiatrists who have met with Trump, have been disclosed?  As far as I am aware, claims of personality disorders are gossip only. 

Diner Cop!
 

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 05, 2020, 02:30:54 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 02:27:29 PM
Diner Cop!

It's a dirty job, but someone has to do it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 05, 2020, 02:33:05 PM
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/05/trump-pushes-georgia-governor-to-help-overturn-biden-election-win-.html

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/05/only-25-republican-lawmakers-have-acknowledged-bidens-win-over-trump-report-.html

Many of Trump's voters appear to be following the president, according to a recent CNBC/Change Research poll. Only 3% of Trump voters surveyed said they accept Biden's victory as legitimate, the survey released Monday found.

A staggering 73% of respondents consider Trump the legitimate winner. Another 24% said they are not sure.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 05, 2020, 02:38:59 PM
Quote from: T. D. on December 05, 2020, 02:33:05 PMOnly 3% of Trump voters surveyed said they accept Biden's victory as legitimate, the survey released Monday found.

That's three percentage points more than the number of Democrats who accepted Trump's victory as legitimate. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 05, 2020, 02:53:00 PM
     
Quote from: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 01:44:55 PM
Fine. By now it's Scholars 8 - drogulus 0. How much do you need to concede defeat? 13 - 0? 27 - 0? 147 - 0? Maybe a challenge in court?  ;D

     $50,000 in collapsing fiat currency would do the trick.

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 02:54:16 PM
Quote from: drogulus on December 05, 2020, 02:53:00 PM
     
     $50,000 in collapsing fiat currency would do the trick.

   

You lose.

By all means, carry on as if nothing happened.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on December 05, 2020, 03:14:37 PM
Quote from: Todd on December 05, 2020, 02:19:53 PM

What documented personality disorders, as diagnosed by clinical psychologists or psychiatrists who have met with Trump, have been disclosed?  As far as I am aware, claims of personality disorders are gossip only. 


Actually a psychologist who knows him well on account of being his niece has offered a diagnosis.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 03:23:49 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on December 05, 2020, 03:14:37 PM
a psychologist who knows him well on account of being his niece has offered a diagnosis.

Risum teneatis, amici?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on December 05, 2020, 03:33:53 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 03:23:49 PM
Risum teneatis, amici?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_ridicule

You're in quite the stirring mood today, aren't you?

I'd go further than the above and say that Trump has offered any psychologist a window to his id through his unfiltered improv ramblings and his petulant twitter feed that one wonders what more they could learn by actually sitting down with him, and if he'd even be capable of anything close to such unvarnished honesty in such a setting.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 03:50:00 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on December 05, 2020, 03:33:53 PM
You're in quite the stirring mood today, aren't you?

Please, show me which one of Trump's actions were unconstitutional and/or broke the US statutory laws.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on December 05, 2020, 04:16:20 PM
You're being disingenuous  because you know that's not what fascists do. They fill all levels of the judiciary with loyalists then make the law whatever they need it to be. And if the votes were closer and there were fewer states contended we'd be seeing the results of that.

You know what else fascists do? They demonize and scapegoat specific groups in society while claiming to know which are the true countrymen. They demonize the free press and demand the media operate as state propaganda.  They refer to people who are on or support other parties as the enemy.They hold rallies where they whip up their base with hate speech and remind them who to hate.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 05, 2020, 04:18:12 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on December 05, 2020, 04:16:20 PM

You know what else fascists do? They demonize and scapegoat specific groups in society while claiming to know which are the true countrymen. They demonize the free press and demand the media operate as state propaganda.  They refer to people who are on or support other parties as the enemy.They hold rallies where they whip up their base with hate speech and remind them who to hate.

Facts are stubborn things.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on December 05, 2020, 07:01:53 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 05, 2020, 11:02:13 AM
Do you think Hitler decorated him for nothing?

Why do you even ask? I don't know my grandfather. How am I supposed to know if he earned it? I DON'T KNOW!! There's a lot more to do in a war than fighting.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 06, 2020, 12:08:20 AM
Posting in this thread is a huge waste of time. I wish I could stop. I must stop.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on December 06, 2020, 12:38:18 AM
Quote from: Florestan on December 06, 2020, 12:08:20 AM
Posting in this thread is a huge waste of time. I wish I could stop. I must stop.

Please do.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: AlberichUndHagen on December 06, 2020, 06:23:54 AM
What would be laughable if it weren't so horrible is the fact that Trump is probably going to face lawsuits... AFTER he's no longer a president, as if the president should be immune to criminal charges. That smells like dictatorship.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 06, 2020, 06:55:28 AM
Quote from: AlberichUndHagen on December 06, 2020, 06:23:54 AM
What would be laughable if it weren't so horrible is the fact that Trump is probably going to face lawsuits... AFTER he's no longer a president, as if the president should be immune to criminal charges. That smells like dictatorship.

Meanwhile, there's the "If the thief is incompetent, theft isn't a crime, let alone, serious" claque.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: flyingdutchman on December 06, 2020, 08:16:39 AM
Quote from: AlberichUndHagen on December 06, 2020, 06:23:54 AM
What would be laughable if it weren't so horrible is the fact that Trump is probably going to face lawsuits... AFTER he's no longer a president, as if the president should be immune to criminal charges. That smells like dictatorship.

Well, he'll certainly face civil suits AND criminal indictments on the state level.  Rightly so.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 06, 2020, 08:45:58 AM
There has been ample coverage (in respectable sources) about post-POTUS legal threats to Cheeto Mussolini.

For instance https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2020-trump-faces-lawsuits-and-legal-threats/

Google will readily summon up others.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on December 06, 2020, 09:57:43 AM
Quote from: Todd on December 05, 2020, 02:19:53 PM

What documented personality disorders, as diagnosed by clinical psychologists or psychiatrists who have met with Trump, have been disclosed?  As far as I am aware, claims of personality disorders are gossip only. 

As to criminality, well, let's just see what 2021 actually brings.

Obviously, it doesn't take training to spot personality disorders, but Trump's niece Mary has the qualifications and has listed a few.

As for the criminality, anyone who's paying attention should be able to name over a hundred crimes Trump has committed. Actually, that's not really fair, since just the money laundering charges for which he was fined for his casinos in Atlantic City gets one over 100. Add in the self dealing, the 430 million tax fraud scheme, sexual assaults, double selling of condos in Trump Tower Panama, campaign finance violations, money laundering for Dmitri Rubolovyev, and on and on ...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 06, 2020, 02:27:31 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on December 06, 2020, 09:57:43 AMObviously, it doesn't take training to spot personality disorders

In the real world, it obviously does.  Also in the real world, family members do not make good judges of other family members when it comes to psychological diagnoses because they lack objectivity.  It is good to know who takes Mary Trump seriously, though.

Perhaps you can list over one hundred crimes that Trump committed.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 07, 2020, 06:16:51 AM
https://www.yahoo.com/news/michigan-secretary-state-says-armed-035400636.html

Michigan secretary of state says armed protesters gathered outside her home
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 07, 2020, 09:02:08 AM
Quote from: T. D. on December 07, 2020, 06:16:51 AM
https://www.yahoo.com/news/michigan-secretary-state-says-armed-035400636.html

Michigan secretary of state says armed protesters gathered outside her home

So, just like any election year, really....
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 07, 2020, 09:12:22 AM
Conservative nonprofit group challenging election results around the country has tie to Trump legal adviser Jenna Ellis
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 07, 2020, 10:56:00 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/07/trump-federal-media-agency-ceo-plots-final-purge-before-biden-arrives.html

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-12-07/trump-adviser-navarro-accused-of-using-post-to-sway-2020-race

President Donald Trump's trade adviser, Peter Navarro, willfully broke the law by engaging in political activity in his official capacity, the latest member of the administration accused of such violations, according to the U.S. Office of Special Counsel.
Navarro used media appearances and social media in an attempt to influence the outcome of the 2020 presidential contest, in violation of the Hatch Act, according to a report released Monday by the government agency. He continued to flout the law even after being told he was being investigated for doing so, the report said.
...
The Hatch Act generally is intended to prevent the use of government power for partisan political purposes. Violations can be punished with both civil penalties -- like fines or suspension from work -- and criminal penalties.
If White House employees violate the Hatch Act, Trump would be the one who would have to penalize them. Trump hasn't acted on previous allegations of Hatch Act violations, including after the OSC recommended he fire Senior Adviser Kellyanne Conway for repeatedly breaking it.


Oh, so Cheeto gets to penalize him? I guess it'll be a far cry from the death penalty... :laugh:

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/trump-cementing-death-penalty-legacy-biden-inaugural-74579070

Trump ratchets up pace of executions before Biden inaugural
As Donald Trump's presidency winds down, his administration is ratcheting up the pace of federal executions despite a surge of coronavirus cases in prisons



Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 08, 2020, 07:00:24 AM

     Undocumented Immigrants Are Half as Likely to Be Arrested for Violent Crimes as U.S.-Born Citizens (https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:8uO-o99uY8cJ:https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/undocumented-immigrants-are-half-as-likely-to-be-arrested-for-violent-crimes-as-u-s-born-citizens/+&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-b-1-d)

The new study aligns with other research suggesting that immigration-reducing policies do not prevent crime. After the federal government introduced the Secure Communities program, which requires local law enforcement to work with federal immigration officials as a means to expel individuals "who present the most significant threats to public safety," deportations increased, but crime did not drop. Likewise Kubrin and her colleagues found that when California became a sanctuary state in 2017—limiting state and local police cooperation with federal immigration authorities—crime rates did not rise. "The reality is that immigration policy is not a solution to curb crime," she says.

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 08, 2020, 07:42:45 AM
AP sources: Biden picks Lloyd Austin as secretary of defense (https://apnews.com/article/lloyd-austin-secretary-of-defense-pick-b4e044e062004bdcc8a5eb087ff74582)


Flournoy didn't get it.  A general did.  I seem to recall something of a hubbub about Trump picking Mattis.  I wonder how many Dems will embrace Austin because of his D affiliation.  Kudos to the failing New York Times, as one of its op-ed states he should not lead DOD.  Maybe an op-ed pro-con statistical analysis can be thrown together in 30-90 days to see which way the wind blows.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 08, 2020, 07:58:47 AM

     Armed Mexicans Were Smuggled In to Guard Border Wall, Whistle-Blowers Say (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/07/us/politics/border-wall-mexico.html?action=click&algo=bandit-all-surfaces-geo&block=more_in_recirc&fellback=false&imp_id=929928979&impression_id=4244b9a2-3971-11eb-b934-f94b7201b183&index=4&pgtype=Article&region=footer&req_id=423860214&surface=more-in-politics)

S.L.S., a primary builder of Mr. Trump's wall, has been awarded contracts worth more than $1.4 billion for work on multiple parts of the border. With those funds, the company is said to have allowed its subcontractor, Ultimate Concrete, to hire armed Mexicans and facilitate illegal border crossings that the president has worked to shut down.

Ultimate Concrete "constructed a dirt road that would allow access from the Mexican side of the border into the United States," the whistle-blowers said in the complaint. "This U.C.-constructed road was apparently the route by which the armed Mexican nationals were unlawfully crossing into the United States."

An S.L.S. project manager then pressured one of the whistle-blowers in July 2019 to not include information about the Mexican security guards in reports required to be submitted to the Army Corps of Engineers.


     (http://forums.mozillazine.org/images/smilies/new_smile-l.gif)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 08, 2020, 12:53:00 PM
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/08/supreme-court-rejects-trump-allys-push-to-overturn-biden-win-in-pennsylvania.html

The Supreme Court on Tuesday turned back an effort by Republicans to reverse President-elect Joe Biden's victory in Pennsylvania.

The top court rejected a petition from Trump ally Rep. Mike Kelly, a Pennsylvania Republican, who argued that virtually all of the state's mail-in ballots were unlawful.

The decision was announced in an order with no noted dissents.

This is breaking news. Please check back for updates.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 08, 2020, 02:04:15 PM
Just like Hillary did four years ago, right?

Trump asks Pennsylvania House speaker for help overturning election results, personally intervening in a third state
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on December 08, 2020, 02:13:16 PM
Quote from: drogulus on December 08, 2020, 07:58:47 AM
     Armed Mexicans Were Smuggled In to Guard Border Wall, Whistle-Blowers Say (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/07/us/politics/border-wall-mexico.html?action=click&algo=bandit-all-surfaces-geo&block=more_in_recirc&fellback=false&imp_id=929928979&impression_id=4244b9a2-3971-11eb-b934-f94b7201b183&index=4&pgtype=Article&region=footer&req_id=423860214&surface=more-in-politics)

S.L.S., a primary builder of Mr. Trump's wall, has been awarded contracts worth more than $1.4 billion for work on multiple parts of the border. With those funds, the company is said to have allowed its subcontractor, Ultimate Concrete, to hire armed Mexicans and facilitate illegal border crossings that the president has worked to shut down.

Ultimate Concrete "constructed a dirt road that would allow access from the Mexican side of the border into the United States," the whistle-blowers said in the complaint. "This U.C.-constructed road was apparently the route by which the armed Mexican nationals were unlawfully crossing into the United States."

An S.L.S. project manager then pressured one of the whistle-blowers in July 2019 to not include information about the Mexican security guards in reports required to be submitted to the Army Corps of Engineers.


     (http://forums.mozillazine.org/images/smilies/new_smile-l.gif)

Reminds me of a Doonesbury strip I can't locate right now where Roland asks a speaker for the Trump border wall where they're going to find workers willing to work long hours for little money in the searing heat, and the official answers vaguely "they're around".
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 09, 2020, 08:27:12 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/09/trump-to-join-texas-in-supreme-court-bid-to-undo-biden-win.html

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/09/states-tell-supreme-court-they-support-texas-bid-to-reverse-biden-win.html

Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh, whose state overwhelmingly voted for Biden over Trump, said in a scornful tweet that Maryland would not join Paxton's case after someone on Twitter suggested he do so.

"The suit is a cesspool of disproved charges, wild speculation, insupportable arguments and silly gibberish," Frosh tweeted.

"Joe Biden is the President-Elect."

Trump earlier Wednesday said he wanted to join Paxton's legal effort at the Supreme Court, which the defendants have dismissed as a political stunt by the Republican attorney general. The Supreme Court has yet to rule on Paxton's request.

Paxton, a Republican who remains under indictment for state felony securities fraud charges, is asking the high court for permission to sue the four states to block their certification of Biden's wins in them.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 09, 2020, 03:12:53 PM
Worth quoting in full:

Trumpism Triumphant

Even in defeat, the GOP surrenders to the nutcases.

Mona Charen

Off and on, for 25 years, I participated in National Review cruises as a speaker. I met lots of wonderful people who were intelligent, curious, and great company—but there were always cranks and conspiracy theorists too. Once, during the Clinton administration, people at my dinner table were repeating the story that Hillary had killed Vince Foster. I choked down my bite of chicken Kiev and responded, as equably as possible, "Well, for that to be true, she would also have had to transport his body to Fort Marcy Park without the Secret Service or anyone else noticing." Several people at the table blinked back at me. Yeah? So?

It was a tell, though I didn't know it at the time. In later years, I noticed that cruisers weren't citing mainstream publications for their information. They weren't even citing National Review (which a fair percentage of the cruisers didn't even read, I learned). They were getting their news from email lists and subscription newsletters. I noticed the same thing when speaking to conservative audiences. Someone was always buttonholing me and thrusting some obscure publication into my hands.

These people were not hard up. They hadn't been displaced from their union jobs by outsourcing. The ladies wore designer dresses and the men sported pinky diamonds. In 2020, people earning more than $100,000 voted for Trump over Biden by 11 points, whereas Biden earned the support of those earning less than $50,000 by 15 points.

There's a theory that people have rallied to Trump and alternative news sources because they feel disrespected by the mainstream, liberal-leaning press. They bristle at the condescension of liberals who, they believe, despise country music, guns, and Cracker Barrel. There is some truth in this, but my experience with conservatives makes me skeptical of that as a complete explanation. Sure, the urban/rural divide is real—and not limited to the United States—but resentment of elites has always been with us. From suspicion of the First Bank of the United States among the Jeffersonians to the populist movement of the 1890s, "coastal elites" have always been despised by some. But it didn't drive people into abject lunacy in the past, or at least, not on the scale we see today.

The resentment motive can't account for our volume of crazy. A theme that unified these conspiracy-minded people was a sense of superiority—not inferiority. They felt that they had access to the hidden truth that the deluded masses didn't understand. It was a key feature of Rush Limbaugh's appeal. He frequently suggested that he understood that real story beneath the official version, and could penetrate the opaque Washington drama by stripping away the polite fictions to reveal the ugly realities beneath.

After decades of this diet, and with an enormous turbo-charge from Trump, the conspiracists are in the driver's seat of the Republican party. Today, the glazed-eyed-Hillary-murdered-Vince Foster-Republicans are, if not the majority, at least a plurality of the Republican party. This is profoundly worrying, because, let's face it, they've suspended their critical faculties. Trump spent months saying mail-in ballots were ripe for fraud. He openly declared that he would not accept the legitimacy of any election he lost. He pressured friendly state legislatures, like Pennsylvania's, not to count mail ballots until election day so that he could weave a story of victory if he did well with in-person voting on Election night, knowing that the count for mail ballots would take longer.

Now consider the average Republican voter. If anyone of their personal acquaintance had said, about an upcoming company baseball game, or their kid's weekend soccer match, that the refs were all corrupt and that the other team always cheats, and then after losing the game, claimed that it was all rigged, they'd roll their eyes and say, "That guy is a little cracked."

Trump is more than a little cracked. What Peter Wehner calls his "disordered personality" has been on vivid display for years. The peevishness, the pettiness, the colossal narcissism—to say nothing of his larger faults. But the normal, ordinary evaluations of character and credibility are suspended in Trump's case.

His legal challenges to the results have been so absurd that if they'd been filed by anyone other than the president of the United States, they might have been thrown out as "frivolous." They have lost 49 of the 50 suits they've filed, and not just lost, but lost with blistering smackdowns from the judges, including those appointed by Trump. "Voters, not lawyers, choose the president," wrote Stephanos Bibas, a judge on the Third Circuit. Another judge wrote:

This Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence. In the United States of America, this cannot justify the disenfranchisement of a single voter, let alone all the voters of its sixth most populated state. Our people, laws, and institutions demand more.

In case you missed it, the Republican party of Arizona is actually asking Republicans to "fight and die" for Trump's stolen election lie. Retweeting Trumpist Ali Akbar who said "I am willing to give my life for this fight," the Arizona GOP replied "He is. Are you?" (The account has since deleted the tweets.)

Eric Metaxas, who wrote a well-received biography of William Wilberforce in 2007 but has tumbled all the way down the rabbit hole into Trump cultism, released a video testament telling Trump, "I'd be happy to die in this fight. This is a fight for everything. God is with us." Former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn is calling for a military coup. One of the president's lawyers called for an official who oversaw election cybersecurity to be shot at dawn.

Even more disturbing than the crackpot statements of hard-core cultists are the Republican elected officials who are behaving like automatons stamped out of a brain-removal factory. The Washington Post contacted all of the Republicans serving in the House and Senate to ask who won the election. Two said Trump, 27 said Biden, and the other 220 declined to say. Ted Cruz, Mr. "Constitutional Conservative," is volunteering to argue Trump's utterly fraudulent stolen election case before the Supreme Court. The Court has other ideas.

A Republican Georgia election official pleaded with the president and others to behave with minimal decency. Noting that people simply doing their jobs—along with their family members—had received explicit rape and death threats, Gabriel Sterling got emotional, predicting, "Someone is going to get shot. Someone is going to get killed," if the president and his henchmen continue the incitement. Within hours of that plea, dozens of armed people gathered outside the home of the Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson as she was decorating a Christmas tree with her four-year-old son. "Stop the steal," they chanted, and "you're murderers."

And then there are the polls showing that shocking numbers of rank-and-file Republicans are buying this big lie. A YouGov/Economist poll found that 73 percent of Republicans had little or no confidence that the election was conducted fairly. A Morning Consult/Politico survey found that 67 percent of Republicans said the election was probably or definitely not free and fair. And a Monmouth University poll found that 75 percent of Republicans were "not too confident" or "not at all confident" that the 2020 election was conducted fairly and accurately. Sixty-four Republican members of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives have signed a letter asking that members of Congress throw out Pennsylvania's slate of electors.

We have now reached the stage where it isn't just that Republicans fail to rebuke Trump. It isn't just that Republicans are frightened into silence by fear of the base. We are now at the stage when a critical mass of the Republican party has adopted Trump's disordered personality for its own. The Republican party is, in this iteration, a danger to American democracy. Our urgent task is, to borrow a phrase, to repeal and replace it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 09, 2020, 03:13:32 PM
It's whackjobs all the way down.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on December 10, 2020, 12:13:09 AM
Lindsay Graham predicts Trump will function as a sort of Shadow President during the Biden years, where he will continue his destructive behavior and keep the GOP legislators in a vise of fealty and fear of retaliation.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 10, 2020, 04:19:04 AM
Graham's prediction is about as meaningful as predictions that Trump would steal the election and serve three or four terms.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on December 10, 2020, 05:13:54 AM
Quote from: Todd on December 10, 2020, 04:19:04 AM
Graham's prediction is about as meaningful as predictions that Trump would steal the election and serve three or four terms.

The predictions, correct ones, were that Trump would try to steal the election and it was Trump himself who suggested the possibility of three or four terms. Graham's prediction is an equally correct assessment of Trump's intentions, because Trump can't live without the attention.   
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 10, 2020, 12:05:05 PM
Tim Miller on the Clown Coup (https://podcast.thebulwark.com/tim-miller-on-the-clown-coup).

"People should be pissed about this."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 10, 2020, 12:28:45 PM
Yep, just like 2016:

- Trump is still tweeting out bizarre calls to "overturn" the election, while pressuring fellow Republicans to stay in line.

- The Texas lawsuit to nullify the election results in four states is a clownish legal stunt. Seriously, it's way dumber than you think.

- Nevertheless the GOP attorneys general in 17 states are backing the suit.

- A congressional floor challenge to the Electoral College vote on January 6 now seems a near-certainty.

- As Mona Charen writes, "We are now at the stage when a critical mass of the Republican party has adopted Trump's disordered personality for its own."

- On Wednesday, 3,054 Americans died of COVID-19. The president made no comment.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on December 10, 2020, 03:37:12 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 10, 2020, 12:28:45 PM
- On Wednesday, 3,054 Americans died of COVID-19. The president made no comment.

That's because Rudy "corona farts" Ghouliani wasn't one of them thanks to the first rate care normal Americans can't even dream about.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on December 10, 2020, 03:59:12 PM
Speaking of Rachel Maddow....I learned just yesterday that she's developed her podcast on Spiro Agnew called The Bag Man into a full length book. There was an interview with her about it on the latest episode of Pod Save America.

(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51rRjA6alqL.jpg)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 10, 2020, 04:05:00 PM
"NEW: FBI agents delivered at least one federal subpoena to the Texas Attorney General's office Wednesday for information in an ongoing investigation involving AG Ken Paxton, three sources confirm, indicating the seriousness with which they are taking allegations against Paxton."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 10, 2020, 04:51:43 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on December 10, 2020, 01:14:15 PMLike everyone else, I'll just assume your assertion has no support.

Right on.


Quote from: BasilValentine on December 10, 2020, 01:14:15 PMHis actions are by his own definition criminal theft.

I see.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on December 11, 2020, 01:34:03 AM
Diana Feinstein's short term memory is deteorating. Diana Feinstein's short term memory is deteorating.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 11, 2020, 05:31:42 AM
In leaked recording, Biden says GOP used 'defund the police' to 'beat the living hell' out of Democrats (https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/leaked-recording-biden-says-gop-used-defund-police-beat-living-n1250757)

Defund the police.  Progressives should redouble their efforts for 2022.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 11, 2020, 06:24:44 AM
J. Rubin: "The Republican Party, ironically the party that used to defend objective reality and scorn victim-mongering, now thrives as an institution in which people, as Trump said at a recent rally, think "we're all victims" and accept Trump's alternative reality. Maybe one day an American Lech Walesa will arrive in the Trump heartland and revive the spirit of democracy. Until then, the GOP remains the "2 + 2 = 5" party."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: flyingdutchman on December 11, 2020, 07:41:20 AM
Trump, the Neo-fascist: https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-just-broke-last-level-085740834.html
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on December 11, 2020, 07:51:49 AM
Quote from: flyingdutchman on December 11, 2020, 07:41:20 AM
Trump, the Neo-fascist: https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-just-broke-last-level-085740834.html

Quote from the article:
" If a Trump came along in Denmark, say, would Denmark elect him? I doubt it. Ditto most European countries."

  It's been talked about here, but the answer is an absolute "No!", at least within a foreseeable horizon, say of 10 years. But the same applies to Biden.
Besides their politics, their rhetorical style wouldn't gain success (Trump would be considered extremist; Biden just without much substance; of course Biden would qualify better, if we'd somehow experienced Trump at first). There's been - and still are - fringe politicians and parties, but generally there's a moderating (or destroying) effect if they go into parliament, where government is only possible via compromises. Often with 5 different parties or more participating, and one single party never getting more than 30-35 % of the total votes, in the last four decades, and many smaller parties getting 3 - 10 % of them, including representation in parliament. This also functions as a system, that lets sudden opinions in society get their steam out, via new parties.

Let me add, that we've a somewhat #45-comparable figure, Glistrup, in the 70s. He didn't get much political influence. His eccentricities and crimes became too much, and when his party split up, the moderate fraction (which expelled him) gained more importance; it's now receding however, with new parties popping up.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 11, 2020, 08:13:19 AM
This is an interesting op-ed if not paywalled:

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-12-11/texas-election-suit-shows-trump-s-grip-on-republican-party

With each passing day, President Donald Trump's losses continue to mount in court challenges to the election results — as of this writing, by one count, the campaign is 1-53. So it's tempting to dismiss and mock the ongoing "clown show." That would be a major error.

Not only do the president's words and actions increase the potential for violence, but they are already doing actual harm to American democracy. And since Trump is a 74-year-old man who is not going to change, it's up to elected Republicans to put a stop to this madness, as at least one Republican (Senator Mitt Romney) has had the courage to call it.

Instead, they are encouraging it. A wildcat lawsuit filed by the Texas attorney general against the voting procedures in Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin (all of them, not coincidentally, won by Joe Biden) was joined by 23 other Republican states and 106 members of the House. That the case is absurd and hypocritical in no way makes it less dangerous. The Republican attorneys general of these states are doing this to placate one man — and the disturbing hold he has on the party's base.


The Founders warned about this moment. In Federalist Papers No. 10, James Madison wrote of the threat of "faction," which he defines as "a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community."

Madison believed that a constitutional republic would serve as a bulwark against faction: "The influence of factious leaders may kindle a flame within their particular States, but will be unable to spread a general conflagration through the other States."

Hold my ale, says Trump's faction.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 11, 2020, 10:37:17 AM
Quote from: T. D. on December 11, 2020, 08:13:19 AM
This is an interesting op-ed if not paywalled:

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-12-11/texas-election-suit-shows-trump-s-grip-on-republican-party (https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-12-11/texas-election-suit-shows-trump-s-grip-on-republican-party)

With each passing day, President Donald Trump's losses continue to mount in court challenges to the election results — as of this writing, by one count, the campaign is 1-53. So it's tempting to dismiss and mock the ongoing "clown show." That would be a major error.

Not only do the president's words and actions increase the potential for violence, but they are already doing actual harm to American democracy. And since Trump is a 74-year-old man who is not going to change, it's up to elected Republicans to put a stop to this madness, as at least one Republican (Senator Mitt Romney) has had the courage to call it.

Instead, they are encouraging it. A wildcat lawsuit filed by the Texas attorney general against the voting procedures in Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin (all of them, not coincidentally, won by Joe Biden) was joined by 23 other Republican states and 106 members of the House. That the case is absurd and hypocritical in no way makes it less dangerous. The Republican attorneys general of these states are doing this to placate one man — and the disturbing hold he has on the party's base.


The Founders warned about this moment. In Federalist Papers No. 10, James Madison wrote of the threat of "faction," which he defines as "a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community."

Madison believed that a constitutional republic would serve as a bulwark against faction: "The influence of factious leaders may kindle a flame within their particular States, but will be unable to spread a general conflagration through the other States."

Hold my ale, says Trump's faction.

Not in his worst nightmares did Jas Madison see 49% of the US electorate lapping up laughable disinformation, let alone contemptible putzes who watch the shit-show for "amusement."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 11, 2020, 12:05:48 PM
From the "A fool and his money..." department:

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/11/trump-official-mick-mulvaneys-hedge-fund-seeking-at-least-1-million-from-investors.html
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 11, 2020, 12:47:48 PM
Quote from: T. D. on December 11, 2020, 12:05:48 PM
From the "A fool and his money..." department:

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/11/trump-official-mick-mulvaneys-hedge-fund-seeking-at-least-1-million-from-investors.html

His competency as a scammer has never been in question.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 11, 2020, 02:50:26 PM
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/11/supreme-court-rejects-texas-lawsuit-challenging-bidens-election-wins-in-4-key-states.html
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 11, 2020, 03:10:57 PM
Quote from: T. D. on December 11, 2020, 02:50:26 PM
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/11/supreme-court-rejects-texas-lawsuit-challenging-bidens-election-wins-in-4-key-states.html

     Someone should buy Bart a beer or 12.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 11, 2020, 04:35:31 PM
Guess it won't be necessary for Ted Cruz to "argue" before the SCOTUS, after all.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 11, 2020, 04:50:44 PM
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-12-11/trump-campaign-to-run-ads-promoting-effort-to-overturn-election

President Donald Trump's campaign plans to buy ads on unspecified cable television networks to promote his effort to overturn the election he lost, highlighting claims that have been refuted by elections officials and dismissed by judges across the country.

One commercial claims that mail-in ballots were "a recipe for fraud" and urges viewers to "contact your legislators today." Trump has sought to persuade Republican state lawmakers in several battleground states to override voters and award him their states' Electoral College votes.

The campaign did not say in a release how much it would spend on the ads or which networks would run them. Trump and the Republican Party have raised about $208 million since the election. The campaign didn't immediately respond to a request for comment on Friday evening.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on December 11, 2020, 04:57:25 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 11, 2020, 04:35:31 PM
Guess it won't be necessary for Ted Cruz to "argue" before the SCOTUS, after all.

His offer was actually on the case SCOTUS refused to hear earlier in the week.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 11, 2020, 05:01:29 PM
Quote from: T. D. on December 11, 2020, 12:05:48 PM
From the "A fool and his money..." department:


Incorrect.  The article indicates that the fund will focus on the financial sector, and pretty much no one on earth has a better understanding of the changes to oversight and enforcement rules at the CFPB than the estimable Mr Mulvaney.  Dems will try to reinvigorate the agency, and it is doubtful that one should be invested in the fund for a decade, but the next 6, 12, or 18 months could prove to be quite lucrative.  The thing is, those able to invest will know precisely what they are getting into.  If I had sufficient investment capital and was accredited, I'd put money in for the short term.  (I know, I know, all other posters on GMG are accredited investors.)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on December 11, 2020, 05:15:39 PM
Lawsplainer

The Texas case SCOTUS refused to hear might cause a bit of confusion.

States suing each other--original jurisdiction--is a case only SCOTUS can hear, and the Court has limited it as much as possible to cases which can't be decided any other way (such as a state official being sued). The Court has a rule in place that the Court must give permission (leave of the Court) to start a case in original jurisdiction. Justices Alito and Thomas have stated in prior cases they believe the Court has to accept such cases no matter what the merits are.

This afternoon's SCOTUS order said leave of the Court was not granted to file because there was no issue on which the Court could rule. Alito and Thomas inserted a sentence to say they would have followed their previous opinion by accepting the case and then dismissing it.  No Justice, including Alito, Thomas, and the three Justices appointed by Trump, publicly dissented from the result itself (throwing the case out on its merits), so Trump apparently had all 9 Justices vote against him, including the three he appointed.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 11, 2020, 05:38:15 PM
Quote from: JBS on December 11, 2020, 04:57:25 PM
His offer was actually on the case SCOTUS refused to hear earlier in the week.

Thanks!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on December 11, 2020, 06:45:17 PM
maybe Cruz should read some 'Green Eggs and Spam' again...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 11, 2020, 07:10:32 PM

     An accredited investor is assumed to be swift enough to take risks ordinary investors should not take. They are often rich enough to be dumb with their money and pay more for the privilege of lower returns and high fees. In truth if you are that sophisticated you don't do this.

QuoteThe thing is, those able to invest will know precisely what they are getting into.

     Mulvaney knows. It's not personal, it's business.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 12, 2020, 05:34:07 AM
Potent stuff from The Graun: Trump's coup is failing but American democracy is still on the critical list (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/dec/12/donald-trump-coup-american-democracy?utm_term=ea7eb3f251d8bca13aa78abddec32004&utm_campaign=GuardianTodayUS&utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&CMP=GTUS_email)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on December 12, 2020, 06:26:35 AM
Quote from: Todd on December 12, 2020, 05:34:07 AM
Potent stuff from The Graun: Trump's coup is failing but American democracy is still on the critical list (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/dec/12/donald-trump-coup-american-democracy?utm_term=ea7eb3f251d8bca13aa78abddec32004&utm_campaign=GuardianTodayUS&utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&CMP=GTUS_email)
I don't get the resentful cynical scorn. I'm not naive either and it is Washington. But still, what's so great about a whole party, millions of people, and elected officials who know better, latching onto this idea that American democracy is no longer legitimate. I can see how or why you poo poo the headline. So far it looks like the gears of democracy are turning inexorably. But it's toxic. I can see it in my family with the one family member who's bought into it. It comes with a host of poisons. It means we're not going to talk about ideas any time soon and there are consequences here that could even turn violent. That's a good chunk of people who really want live in a twisted reality. And I'm well aware of toxicity on many sides of the political spectrum. I'm just saying that this change tump sold his people ain't good and ain't harmless. You can pick out the most outrageous headlines and arguments on the anti-tump side, but that'd be a straw man, wouldn't it?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 12, 2020, 06:41:17 AM
Quote from: milk on December 12, 2020, 06:26:35 AM
I don't get the resentful cynical scorn. I'm not naive either and it is Washington. But still, what's so great about a whole party, millions of people, and elected officials who know better, latching onto this idea that American democracy is no longer legitimate. I can see how or why you poo poo the headline. So far it looks like the gears of democracy are turning inexorably. But it's toxic. I can see it in my family with the one family member who's bought into it. It comes with a host of poisons. It means we're not going to talk about ideas any time soon and there are consequences here that could even turn violent. That's a good chunk of people who really want live in a twisted reality. And I'm well aware of toxicity on many sides of the political spectrum. I'm just saying that this change tump sold his people ain't good and ain't harmless. You can pick out the most outrageous headlines and arguments on the anti-tump side, but that'd be a straw man, wouldn't it?


What?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 12, 2020, 06:51:22 AM
Quote from: milk on December 12, 2020, 06:26:35 AM
I don't get the resentful cynical scorn.

     Are you sure about that? Trump has attempted a coup. Those who claim it wasn't happening turned out to be wrong. Those who claim it wasn't serious were wrong.

     Most people thought it would fail. That failure, though, is not evidence that it didn't happen.

     The wrongsters can't make 2+2=5, so they attack any and all messengers who say 2+2=4.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 12, 2020, 07:10:55 AM
     It's interesting to find that European ignorami get what's happening in the US almost as well as Americans do.

Brussels-based political scientist Roland Freudenstein, director of the Wilfried Martens Centre for European Studies, sees the glass of democracy half-full, as well as half-empty. "On the one hand, the U.S. democracy redeemed itself in the eyes of Europe because the madman was not reelected. On the other hand, there's a huge discrediting of the U.S. democracy by the incumbent who is basically hollowing out the democratic process from the inside." Trump's refusal to accept the results of the election is not just weakening American democracy, Freudenstein says, but also democratic governments all over the world. "We always expected he would cause trouble and mischief, but even moderate Republicans thought this would stop after 10 days or two weeks — but it's not stopping."

For Marius Dragomir, Director of the Center for Media, Data and Society in Budapest, who grew up in Romania where his family once huddled around the radio listening to Radio Free Europe with the volume low and the drapes closed, Trump's recent attacks on the electoral process along with his actions over the past four years are heartbreaking. "America was the model and the dream for Eastern Europe, especially after 1990. But it's not anymore," he says, "especially after Trump."


     How they do that? Doesn't knowledge stop at the water's edge?

     Don't be too embarrassed to state the obvious. Some things are true even if the media says so.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 07:30:42 AM
Quote from: drogulus on December 12, 2020, 07:10:55 AM
     For Marius Dragomir, Director of the Center for Media, Data and Society in Budapest, who grew up in Romania where his family once huddled around the radio listening to Radio Free Europe with the volume low and the drapes closed, Trump's recent attacks on the electoral process along with his actions over the past four years are heartbreaking. "America was the model and the dream for Eastern Europe, especially after 1990. But it's not anymore," he says, "especially after Trump."[/i]

Ahem!.... are you sure it's Budapest? Judging by the guy's name and by the fact he is Romanian, it should rather be Bucharest.  ;D ;D ;D  Heck, my family too listened to Radio Free Europe and the Voice of America (in our neck of the woods the latter was less jammed than the former.)

But then again, I've never ever heard of him or of the Center for Media, Data and Society....
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on December 12, 2020, 07:33:04 AM
Quote from: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 07:30:42 AM
Ahem!.... are you sure it's Budapest? Judging by the guy's name and by the fact he is Romanian, it should rather be Bucharest.  ;D ;D ;D

But then again, I've never ever heard of him or of the Center for Media, Data and Society....

It is Budapest
https://people.ceu.edu/marius_dragomir
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 07:34:53 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on December 12, 2020, 07:33:04 AM
It is Budapest
https://people.ceu.edu/marius_dragomir

Traitor!  >:D :P
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 12, 2020, 07:41:33 AM
     https://www.youtube.com/v/DiUzRdJI-YY&ab_channel=ChillTV

     We are assured by this media outlet that the coup that's not happening is not over yet.

Quote from: MusicTurner on December 12, 2020, 07:33:04 AM
It is Budapest
https://people.ceu.edu/marius_dragomir

     He used to work for the Open Society Foundation.

Quote from: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 07:34:53 AM
Traitor!  >:D :P

     You're right. He used to work for the Open Society Foundation.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 07:50:22 AM
Quote from: drogulus on December 12, 2020, 07:41:33 AM
      You're right. He used to work for the Open Society Foundation.

Worse than a traitor, a Soros-ist.  >:D :P
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 12, 2020, 08:23:26 AM

     https://www.youtube.com/v/TQ0imduTI1Y&ab_channel=NTD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 12, 2020, 08:31:32 AM
And, on the theme of The President Bullshits Endlessly, So We Just Bullshit Along With Him:

"Sidney Powell's secret 'military intelligence expert,' key to fraud claims in election lawsuits, never worked in military intelligence"
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on December 12, 2020, 12:28:07 PM
Quote from: drogulus on December 12, 2020, 07:10:55 AM
     It's interesting to find that European ignorami get what's happening in the US almost as well as Americans do.
(...)

    I came across the original source:
https://news.yahoo.com/trumps-desperate-gambit-to-stay-in-office-alarms-europeans-who-know-about-coups-233538288.html?soc_src=social-sh&soc_trk=tw&tsrc=twtr

    Concerning the militant right, I also checked up a bit on Sidney Powell. Her rhetoric is quite typical of the extreme right. Until a few days ago, she was a member of #45's chosen "Elite Team", and this is some of the stuff that she has retweeted within the last 24 hours, besides tweets from #45, and some with religious colouring. She seems as radicalized as Bannon, but then, after all, she's also less of a figure of the past. People seem to agree that it really is her account.

- "Trump still has two major paths to victory. Path 1: Civil path with a big SCOTUS win. Path 2: Military path using his 2018 EO. Lets all hope SCOTUS makes the right decision."

- "OPINION: We Just Moved One Step Closer To A Second Civil War Or A Huge Secession Movement! So Very Sad That 2020 Was The Year Justice Died In America!"

- "We will decimate the deep state and anyone that protects them as it is our duty to take down tyranny. This election was run like a 3rd world cesspool all while foreign attacks by the CCP on our sovereignty continue. We should be declaring war on the ChiCom's."

(https://twitter.com/SidneyPowell1)
(https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1337679783614947328)


Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 12, 2020, 12:31:34 PM
"A military path"? Lawd!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 12:34:05 PM
Quote from: MusicTurner on December 12, 2020, 12:28:07 PM
   - "OPINION: We Just Moved One Step Closer To A Second Civil War Or A Huge Secession Movement! So Very Sad That 2020 Was The Year Justice Died In America!"

- "We will decimate the deep state and anyone that protects them as it is our duty to take down tyranny. This election was run like a 3rd world cesspool all while foreign attacks by the CCP on our sovereignty continue. We should be declaring war on the ChiCom's."

Who's going to take this drivel seriously, I wonder?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 12:35:06 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 12, 2020, 12:31:34 PM
"A military path"? Lawd!

There'll be a cold day in Hell before that!  ;D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 12, 2020, 12:38:01 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 12:34:05 PM
Who's going to take this drivel seriously, I wonder?

In the sense that this is actual bilge coming out of Trumpworld?

Or in the sense that all this bilge is actual battering against democracy?

It would be irresponsibly naive (at best) to just laugh it off.

Are the death threats from Trumpworld "nothing"?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on December 12, 2020, 12:45:49 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 12:34:05 PM
Who's going to take this drivel seriously, I wonder?

Interesting question. Her views have been known for long, and yet she qualified for #45 at first, like Bannon. As said, you'll encounter such ideas quite a lot among the extreme right people.

Interesting this one today also, from the head of the GOP in Texas, suggesting Trump-friendly ("law-abiding") states secession:
"... this decision establishes a precedent that says states can violate the US constitution and not be held accountable. This decision will have far-reaching ramifications for the future of our constitutional republic. Perhaps law-abiding states should bond together and form a Union of states that will abide by the constitution."
He may be polemical, or fishing for votes, but nonetheless he outwardly introduces the idea in an official writing.

https://abc13.com/secession-texas-to-leave-us-allen-west-gop/8720150/
https://www.texasgop.org/chairman-allen-wests-response-to-scotus-decision/


Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 12:48:23 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 12, 2020, 12:38:01 PM
In the sense that this is actual bilge coming out of Trumpworld?

It is actual bilge. It's drivel. It's nothing. Trump lost. Whether he acknowledges or not, it doesn't matter. He's already history.

QuoteOr in the sense that all this bilge is actual battering against democracy?

Democracy will prevail December 14, 2020. It will also prevail January 20, 2021. Trump will not prevail against democracy.

QuoteIt would be irresponsibly naive (at best) to just laugh it off.

On the contrary, it should be universally hailed as a resounding triumph of democracy and the rule of law.

Quote
Are the death threats from Trumpworld "nothing"?

No, not at all. All those threats should be prosecuted by the law, and all culprits should be punished according to the law. The rule of law should --- and I'm confident it will --- prevail.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 12:49:14 PM
Quote from: MusicTurner on December 12, 2020, 12:45:49 PM
Interesting question. Her views have been known for long, and yet she qualified for #45 at first, like Bannon. As said, you'll encounter such ideas quite a lot among the extreme right people.

Interesting this one today also, from the head of the GOP in Texas, suggesting Trump-friendly ("law-abiding") states secession:
"... this decision establishes a precedent that says states can violate the US constitution and not be held accountable. This decision will have far-reaching ramifications for the future of our constitutional republic. Perhaps law-abiding states should bond together and form a Union of states that will abide by the constitution."
He may be polemical, or fishing for votes, but nonetheless he outwardly introduces the idea in an official writing.

https://abc13.com/secession-texas-to-leave-us-allen-west-gop/8720150/
https://www.texasgop.org/chairman-allen-wests-response-to-scotus-decision/

Who's going to take this drivel seriously, I wonder?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 12, 2020, 12:49:26 PM
Quote from: MusicTurner on December 12, 2020, 12:45:49 PMHe may be polemical, or fishing for votes, but nonetheless he outwardly introduces the idea in an official writing.

People blabber about secession all the time in the US.  Only a non-American could possibly consider this serious.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on December 12, 2020, 12:56:01 PM
e
Quote from: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 12:49:14 PM
Who's going to take this drivel seriously, I wonder?

There are at least three potential layers:

1) people in party/parliament politics
2) some members of the broader public
3) active groups not involved directly in politics, including militias and loony people, finding it inspirational
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 01:01:54 PM
Quote from: MusicTurner on December 12, 2020, 12:56:01 PM
e
There are at least three potential layers:

1) people in party/parliament politics
2) some members of the broader public
3) active groups not involved directly in politics, including militias and loony people, finding it inspirational

I'm willing to bet that all three layers will subside and recede after January 20, 2021.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on December 12, 2020, 01:09:32 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 01:01:54 PM
I'm willing to bet that all three layers will subside and recede after January 20, 2021.

Yes, seems likely. But for activities among 3), there's recently been, for example
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/six-arrested-federal-charge-conspiracy-kidnap-governor-michigan


Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: ritter on December 12, 2020, 01:12:34 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 12:48:23 PM
...Trump will not prevail against democracy.....
We're making progress. You now seem to acknowledge he's infringing upon democracy...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 01:12:38 PM
Quote from: MusicTurner on December 12, 2020, 01:09:32 PM
Yes, seems likely. But for activities among 3), there's recently been, for example
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/six-arrested-federal-charge-conspiracy-kidnap-governor-michigan

Keywords: arrested, federal charge --- ie, the rule of law is up and running in the USA.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 01:18:00 PM
Quote from: ritter on December 12, 2020, 01:12:34 PM
We're making progress. You now seem to acknowledge he's infringing upon democracy...

He unsuccesfully yet legally challenged in legal courts the result of a legally held election. He legally lost. He will be legally replaced by Joe Biden.

If all of the above seem to you like something infringing upon democracy, then so be it. I beg to differ.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 12, 2020, 01:20:25 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 12:48:23 PM
It is actual bilge. It's drivel. It's nothing. Trump lost. Whether he acknowledges or not, it doesn't matter. He's already history.

Drivel ≠ insignificant.  As president, yes, he will soon be history.  As the figurehead of Trumpism, he's going strong.

"whether Trump acknowledges it or not" is one thing.  70% of Republicans who believe the election was "stolen" is another.

There's quite a scale between "laugh it off" and "lose sleep over it," but "laugh it off" is folly IMO.

Four years ago, I should have said it would be a cold day in hell before a professional couple, both lawyers, would brandish firearms at protesters.

I should have said it would be a cold day in hell before this couple were invited as guest speakers at the convention of a major party.

Of course, I would not literally have said that four years ago, because then such events were unthinkable.

This society is dysfunctional, and that's not going to magically change when Biden takes the oath of office.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on December 12, 2020, 01:22:44 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 01:12:38 PM
Keywords: arrested, federal charge --- ie, the rule of law is up and running in the USA.

That's not really the point. The point is what got them planning it. And some people might be brighter, or more 'efficient'.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 12, 2020, 01:25:42 PM
Quote from: MusicTurner on December 12, 2020, 01:22:44 PM
That's not really the point. The point is what got them planning it. And some people might be brighter, or more 'efficient'.

Andrei seems to be ignoring possible aftereffects of Trump's repeated and brazen stress-tests against the rule of law.  not necessarily beginning with the Senate's "acquittal."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 01:29:12 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 12, 2020, 01:20:25 PM
This society is dysfunctional

What do you mean by "a functional society"?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 01:34:02 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 12, 2020, 01:25:42 PM
Andrei seems to be ignoring possible aftereffects of Trump's repeated and brazen stress-tests against the rule of law.  not necessarily beginning with the Senate's "acquittal."

I'm willing to bet that the possibility that the rule of law in the USA will be overturned by Trump or any of his followers is much lesser than the possibility that the Sun will not rise again tomorrow. Are you, Karl?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 01:39:24 PM
Quote from: MusicTurner on December 12, 2020, 01:22:44 PM
That's not really the point. The point is what got them planning it. And some people might be brighter, or more 'efficient'.

If some people are brighter and more efficient than the rule of law, then that rule of law is not worth much to begin with.  ;D

Be it as it might be, the USA is the only country in the world that has never experienced any dictatorship for as long as her history run.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 12, 2020, 02:17:12 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 01:34:02 PM
I'm willing to bet that the possibility that the rule of law in the USA will be overturned by Trump or any of his followers is much lesser than the possibility that the Sun will not rise again tomorrow. Are you, Karl?

     The odds may favor you, but it's also the case that when democracies are overthrown there are plenty of people making the same bet. One factor influencing me is that taking the possibilities seriously is not inconsistent with mockery of the putschists. I'm mindful that putsches are always clownish right up to the point they become serious, notwithstanding that most of them don't get that far.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 12, 2020, 02:18:06 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 01:18:00 PMHe unsuccesfully yet legally challenged in legal courts the result of a legally held election. He legally lost. He will be legally replaced by Joe Biden.


Even in victory, the left sees scary bogeymen all around, threats to democracy everywhere, and insist over and over and over, as the op-ed propaganda they consume likewise insists, that Donald Trump has unique and special abilities to harm core institutions and the rule of law.  But he does not.  It's low wattage mass hysteria.  To be sure, it is basically relegated to online life. 

Now, if Trump does declare his candidacy for 2024 on inauguration day - and he should - that means that he will persist as a dark force in the minds of a variety of people, and the cottage industry of anti-Trump hyperbole and hand-wringing will persist, if in weakened form. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 02:28:53 PM
Quote from: drogulus on December 12, 2020, 02:17:12 PM
     The odds may favor you, but it's also the case that when democracies are overthrown there are plenty of people making the same bet. One factor influencing me is that taking the possibilities seriously is not inconsistent with mockery of the putschists. I'm mindful that putsches are always clownish right up to the point they become serious, notwithstanding that most of them don't get that far.

You'll have to translate this in plain English for me.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 12, 2020, 02:35:01 PM
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/12/trump-loses-wisconsin-election-lawsuit-cemeting-biden-win.html

The judge, a Cheeto Mussolini appointee, dismissed the lawsuit "with prejudice".  :laugh:
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 02:40:32 PM
Quote from: T. D. on December 12, 2020, 02:35:01 PM
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/12/trump-loses-wisconsin-election-lawsuit-cemeting-biden-win.html

The judge, a Cheeto Mussolini appointee, dismissed the lawsuit "with prejudice".  :laugh:

And yet Cheeto Mussolini is a Fascist.... Boggles the mind, really...

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 12, 2020, 02:43:12 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 02:40:32 PM
And yet Cheeto Mussolini is a Fascist.... Boggles the mind, really...


Right.  The fascist thug with the power to topple the republic on a whim keeps losing in court.  It's very scary in the States right now.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 02:48:05 PM
Quote from: Todd on December 12, 2020, 02:43:12 PM
The fascist thug with the power to topple the republic on a whim keeps losing in court. 

Risum teneatis, amici?



Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 12, 2020, 03:10:49 PM
   
     I can't say I'm scared about what's happening. My money, when it's not on my mind, is on the government officials upholding the rule of law. So say the op-ed propagandists, too. I'm not aware of any that are predicting Trump will win.

     If you want to know what mass hysteria looks like watch the Newsmax coverage of the Trump demo. Alex Jones spoke, Sean Moon was there, and so was Frank Gaffney. Various and sundry freakazoids also spoke, screamed, prayed and so forth. The impression I derived was that the crowd was not composed of optimal shock troops for the revolution.

Quote from: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 02:28:53 PM
You'll have to translate this in plain English for me.

     It's OK, just do your best.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 03:13:44 PM
Quote from: drogulus on December 12, 2020, 03:10:49 PM
        It's OK, just do your best.

You'll have to translate this in plain English for me.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 12, 2020, 03:22:52 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 03:13:44 PM
You'll have to translate this in plain English for me.

     (http://forums.mozillazine.org/images/smilies/new_vampv.gif)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 03:29:09 PM
Quote from: drogulus on December 12, 2020, 03:22:52 PM
     (http://forums.mozillazine.org/images/smilies/new_vampv.gif)

   

You'll have to translate this in plain English for me.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 12, 2020, 03:34:37 PM

     Nu beau ..... vin.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 03:38:36 PM
Quote from: drogulus on December 12, 2020, 03:34:37 PM
     Nu beau ..... vin.

Joseph Robinette Biden Jr

President-Elect iof the USA

Your point being?...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 12, 2020, 03:45:20 PM

     There's something wrong with my bloody internet today. My little vampire keeps disappearing.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 03:46:39 PM
Quote from: drogulus on December 12, 2020, 03:45:20 PM
     There's something wrong with my bloody internet today. My little vampire keeps disappearing.

Too bad.  ;D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 12, 2020, 04:26:39 PM

     OK, I'm in Bucharest. There's my baby!

     (http://forums.mozillazine.org/images/smilies/new_vampv.gif) (http://forums.mozillazine.org/images/smilies/new_vampv.gif) (http://forums.mozillazine.org/images/smilies/new_vampv.gif)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on December 12, 2020, 08:23:24 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 01:18:00 PM

If all of the above seem to you like something infringing upon democracy, then so be it. I beg to differ.

You need better information. Trump threatened election officials and legislators with reprisals if they failed to take action to exclude legal ballots. This is a gross abuse of power, inconsistent with democratic principles, and illegal for anyone without presidential immunity. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on December 12, 2020, 10:17:32 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on December 12, 2020, 08:23:24 PM
You need better information. Trump threatened election officials and legislators with reprisals if they failed to take action to exclude legal ballots. This is a gross abuse of power, inconsistent with democratic principles, and illegal for anyone without presidential immunity.
it's all gaslighting from them. Has American democracy stopped in its tracks? No. Has tump convinced millions that they live in an alternate universe? Yes. Is it dangerous? Yes. It's dangerous.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on December 13, 2020, 12:03:16 AM
I see GMG's got two USA politix topics now, with the personality types morphing, via phrenology (head size predicts political orientation) into yet another outlet for the usual suspects, who obviously are unaware of the murky history of phrenology, a hundred years ago...

Which brings me to yesterday's demonstrations in DC and other places. Invariably these demonstrations seem to involve folks who have come from all over the country to drink beer and shout at some building perceived to be indifferent to their plight.

I'm not going to ask why they do this (this would require measuring their skull), but I am wondering, Don't these people have jobs and things to do? Last time I checked airplanes don't fly for free (unless it's Airforce One) and traveling across the country in a rusty pickup truck takes a lot of time and gas, too.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on December 13, 2020, 03:52:59 AM
Quote from: Todd on December 12, 2020, 02:18:06 PM
Even in victory, the left sees scary bogeymen all around,...

The left didn't win in the presidential race. It lost when Bernie Sanders dropped out of the race in the primary. Oligarchs won, again. They got their status quo manager and nothing will fundamentally change. Biden is not "left". Not even close. He is a moderate Republican at heart.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on December 13, 2020, 04:00:22 AM
Quote from: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 01:29:12 PM
What do you mean by "a functional society"?

Finland?  ;D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on December 13, 2020, 04:10:49 AM
Quote from: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 12:48:23 PM
Democracy will prevail December 14, 2020. It will also prevail January 20, 2021. Trump will not prevail against democracy.

Yes, that's true, but does it prevail next time? This time Biden's victory was pretty clear with 306 electoral votes. That's pretty hard to overturn, but in 2000 the Republicans where able to steal the election because it was only one state, Florida, and some 500 votes. So, are we going to see these clown coups with every election where Democrats win from now on as the Republicans are openly against democracy and just want their own king in power?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on December 13, 2020, 04:31:47 AM
Quote from: Florestan on December 12, 2020, 12:48:23 PM
It is actual bilge. It's drivel. It's nothing. Trump lost. Whether he acknowledges or not, it doesn't matter. He's already history.

Democracy will prevail December 14, 2020. It will also prevail January 20, 2021. Trump will not prevail against democracy.


I'm not getting why this has turned into such a big point of contention here - that it doesn't matter now even if rejecting reality is a party's cause and reason for being. People who believe in one kind of nonsense are very likely to believe in many kinds of nonsense. My reasons are somewhat anecdotal, but I suspect it's objectively true. Let's see. Covid is fake, masks are fake, vaccines are fake, and Biden's win is fake. One side here seems to be leaning very heavily into "it's much ado about nothing." Maybe there's just a different lesson to be garnered because social media has the echo chambers and the weakening of rational behavior. That goes for the left too. There were a bunch, even on the very far left, saying it was such a big deal that trump was impeached over a "nothing burger." But, like, who cares, right? Just politics, etc. Maybe the bigger point is about social media making everything worse and this just being the beginning of our complete exodus from reality. I do worry about people not living in reality because things do have a way of going wrong in reality.     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 13, 2020, 06:34:04 AM
No, the putrescent figurehead ain't going away:

In challenging election defeat, Trump cements his control over the Republican Party
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 13, 2020, 07:21:24 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 13, 2020, 06:34:04 AM
No, the putrescent figurehead ain't going away:

In challenging election defeat, Trump cements his control over the Republican Party

Well, yeah, that's a big reason he's doing it. And don't fantasize that he'll go away after 1/20.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 13, 2020, 07:32:20 AM
Op-eds truly are one of the more powerful forms of propaganda.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 13, 2020, 08:10:40 AM

     Trumpists Believe Bill Gates Is Using Coronavirus to Implant Brain Chips (https://www.thedailybeast.com/trumpists-believe-bill-gates-is-using-coronavirus-to-implant-brain-chips)

     First, where can I get one? Second, I didn't find it in a failing op-ed, so does this mean it's true?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 13, 2020, 08:30:53 AM

     Gates is spewing his anti-virus propaganda on CNN. He looks very chipper.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 13, 2020, 08:47:15 AM
Quote from: drogulus on December 13, 2020, 08:10:40 AM
     Trumpists Believe Bill Gates Is Using Coronavirus to Implant Brain Chips (https://www.thedailybeast.com/trumpists-believe-bill-gates-is-using-coronavirus-to-implant-brain-chips)

     First, where can I get one? Second, I didn't find it in a failing op-ed, so does this mean it's true?

That story's been around forever (4/16 dateline on linked story). Haven't checked lately, but months ago polls indicated that a large percentage of Repugs believe the theory.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 13, 2020, 08:57:13 AM
Well, they'll believe anything.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 13, 2020, 09:26:35 AM

     The 10 most important things I've learned about trust over my 100 years (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/12/11/10-most-important-things-ive-learned-about-trust-over-my-100-years/?arc404=true)
     
     Happy 100th birthday to George P. Schultz.

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 13, 2020, 10:03:52 AM

     Trump Flies Over Stop The Steal Rally Where Supporters Chant 'Destroy The GOP!' (https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/trump-flies-over-stop-the-steal-rally-where-supporters-chant-destroy-the-gop)

     "Hurry, My Children, Hurry"

     (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/smiley.gif)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 13, 2020, 11:03:07 AM
Historic D.C. Black churches attacked during pro-Trump rallies Saturday

By Allison Klein
Dec. 13, 2020 at 12:49 p.m. EST

A Black Lives Matter banner and sign were torn from historic Black churches in downtown D.C. and destroyed during pro-Trump protests Saturday night.

In one of the incidents, a series of videos posted on Twitter shows a group of people identified as Proud Boys marching with a Black Lives Matter banner held above their heads, then cheering as it is set on fire while chanting "f--- antifa."

The banner was taken from Asbury United Methodist Church, one of the oldest Black churches in the city. Ashbury United has stood at the corner of 11th and K streets NW since 1836.

"Last night demonstrators who were part of the MAGA gatherings tore down our Black Lives Matter sign and literally burned it in the street," senior pastor Rev. Ianther M. Mills said in a statement. "It pained me especially to see our name, Asbury, in flames. For me it was reminiscent of cross burnings."

Another video, posted by @BGOnTheScene, shows a Black Lives Matter sign being torn down from in front of Metropolitan African Methodist Episcopal Church at 15th and M Streets NW.

D.C. police on Sunday morning declined to say whether any arrests were made in the cases, but said they are investigating them as possible hate crimes.

"We take these offenses seriously and we are currently investigating them as a possible hate crimes," police spokeswoman Alaina Gertz said.

Nearly three dozen people were arrested during the protests and overnight, including 10 who police said were charged with misdemeanor assaults, six with assaulting police officers and four with rioting.

The protesters were in the District on Saturday to demonstrate their refusal to accept the results of the presidential election, two days before the electoral college will make President Trump's loss official.

Mills' statement, which was sent Sunday morning, emphasized the history of her church.

"We are a resilient people who have trusted in God through slavery and the Underground Railroad, Jim Crow and the civil rights movement, and now as we face an apparent rise in white supremacy," it said.

The videos of the banner burning shows someone squirting what appears to be an accelerant on the sign as flames consume it. One video was tweeted by a Daily Caller reporter, and it is stamped with the logo of the right-wing media website.

The tweet says the people burning the banner are Proud Boys. "The Proud Boys and Trump supporters burn the BLM banner while chanting and cheering in downtown DC."

D.C. Council member-elect Janeese Lewis George (D-Ward 4) tweeted the video, saying it showed "there are two justice systems in this country."

"Tonight, violent white supremacist stole and burned a Black Lives Matter banner from Asbury United Methodist, the oldest Black Methodist church in DC," she tweeted. "But yet no militarized police force used against them. There are two justice systems in this country, separate and unequal."

Mills statement pointed out that the Proud Boys, a male-chauvinist organization with ties to white nationalism, have not been denounced by the top levels of government. In fact, the group received recognition from Trump himself at a presidential debate in September, when he told them to "stand back and stand by."

"Sadly, we must point out that if this was a marauding group of men of color going through the city, and destroying property, they would have been followed and arrested," Mills' said in her statement. "We are especially alarmed that this violence is not being denounced at the highest levels of our nation and instead the leaders of this movement are being invited to the White House."

But Mills also struck an optimistic tone to fight hate.

"We are a people of faith. As horrible and disturbing as this is for us now — it doesn't compare with the challenges and fears the men and women who started Asbury, 184 years ago, faced. So, we will move forward, undaunted in our assurance that Black Lives Matter and we are obligated to continue to shout that truth without ceasing. We are assured that our church is surrounded by God's grace and mercy."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 13, 2020, 11:24:56 AM
No, It's Not Over Yet (https://morningshots.thebulwark.com/p/no-its-not-over-yet)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 13, 2020, 11:28:58 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 13, 2020, 11:24:56 AM
No, It's Not Over Yet (https://morningshots.thebulwark.com/p/no-its-not-over-yet)

Quote from: Chas SykesThe Wall of Shame still stands. It's worth keeping in mind that 126 Republican members of the House endorsed the absurd lawsuit that was summarily dismissed by the Supreme Court.

Let me repeat that: Nearly two-thirds of the House GOP members endorsed the legal clown coup that would have disenfranchised tens of millions of American voters.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on December 14, 2020, 04:59:50 AM
The electors are voting today (if you haven't already heard  ;) ).  You can watch it on CSPAN starting at 10 a.m. EST.  I turned the channel on this morning and listened to a fascinating discussion with Jeffrey Rosen [(who is the president and CEO of the National Constitution Center (located in Philly)].  A news anchor was asking him questions about constitutional law and viewers were also encouraged to call in with their questions including what could happen on January 6 and the chances of the popular vote being overturned.

Would be a wonderful place to visit!

https://constitutioncenter.org/about

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on December 14, 2020, 05:04:10 AM
Quote from: Todd on December 14, 2020, 04:50:20 AM

Perfect and predictable examples of left wing principle.
Well I've met people who actually stick to the principle, which is crazier than hypocrisy, if not worse. They actually believe that "believe all women" is reasonable. To me, "believe all x," where "x" is anything you like, is a nonstarter. I got involved in a three way argument where a dude tried to "be an ally" to a zoomer feminist by mansplaining that it really means "taking claims more seriously." Boy did she let him have it. No, it literally means believe ALL women.
Crazy kids!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 14, 2020, 05:12:09 AM
Russian government hackers are behind a broad espionage campaign that has compromised U.S. agencies, including Treasury and Commerce
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on December 14, 2020, 05:17:58 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 14, 2020, 05:12:09 AM
Russian government hackers are behind a broad espionage campaign that has compromised U.S. agencies, including Treasury and Commerce
I saw an article on the BBC's news about 'malicious actors' but haven't read it yet.

A bit further news re the casting of votes today (from the NY Post):

"Will it be broadcast and live-streamed?

A number of news outlets, including CNN, CNN.com and C-Span will carry the votes. Many states will also have livestreams, including Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Georgia, where the results were contested in the courts"

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 14, 2020, 08:26:57 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on December 14, 2020, 05:17:58 AM
I saw an article on the BBC's news about 'malicious actors' but haven't read it yet.

A bit further news re the casting of votes today (from the NY Post):

"Will it be broadcast and live-streamed?

A number of news outlets, including CNN, CNN.com and C-Span will carry the votes. Many states will also have livestreams, including Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Georgia, where the results were contested in the courts"

PD

     I watched a little bit of the coverage on CNN. I'll dip back in later.

Quote from: milk on December 14, 2020, 05:04:10 AM
Well I've met people who actually stick to the principle, which is crazier than hypocrisy, if not worse. They actually believe that "believe all women" is reasonable. To me, "believe all x," where "x" is anything you like, is a nonstarter. I got involved in a three way argument where a dude tried to "be an ally" to a zoomer feminist by mansplaining that it really means "taking claims more seriously." Boy did she let him have it. No, it literally means believe ALL women.
Crazy kids!

     Did she have a good argument? I don't think there is one. My take is that what's at stake is the pervasive disbelief in credible sexual assault claims by women.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 14, 2020, 09:18:47 AM

     Trump raises China concerns as reason to veto defense bill (https://news.yahoo.com/trump-raises-china-concerns-reason-173858622.html)

Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island, the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said Trump's declaration that China is the biggest winner in the defense bill is false. Reed also noted the shifting explanations Trump has given for the veto threats.

"President Trump clearly hasn't read the bill, nor does he understand what's in it," Reed said. "There are several bipartisan provisions in here that get tougher on China than the Trump Administration has ever been."


     What is this guy talking about? Trump has read the bill, or had someone read it to him, and he understands the part of it that affects him just fine.

     Congress bans anonymous shell companies after long campaign by anti-corruption groups (https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2020/12/11/anonymous-shell-company-us-ban/)

A groundbreaking measure to ban anonymous shell companies in the United States cleared Congress on Friday as the Senate joined the House in passing a defense-spending bill with a veto-proof margin.

The Corporate Transparency Act, which was tacked onto the defense bill, would require corporations and limited liability companies established in the United States to disclose their real owners to the Treasury Department, making it harder for criminals to anonymously launder money or evade taxes. The rule applies to future and existing entities alike.


Tolerance of anonymous shell companies has long helped drug- and human- traffickers, organized crime groups and foreign kleptocrats launder their ill-gotten gains through the U.S. financial system, supporters of the legislation say. It took Michael Cohen, President Trump's former lawyer, only a few days to set up and use an anonymous Delaware LLC to pay hush money to Stormy Daniels, in violation of campaign finance laws.

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 14, 2020, 09:24:02 AM
Nobody is sure he can read.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on December 14, 2020, 09:39:26 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 14, 2020, 09:24:02 AM
Nobody is sure he can read.

Maybe he can, but is he willing to read?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on December 14, 2020, 11:16:07 AM
Concerning the attention angle of the next 2-4 years, etc. 

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/12/14/trump-2024-possible-run-444460
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 14, 2020, 12:07:10 PM
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-12-14/wisconsin-supreme-court-rejects-trump-bid-to-invalidate-votes

It was only a 4-3 decision, though, and there were dissenting opinions!

Wisconsin's highest court rejected President Donald Trump's lawsuit seeking to throw out thousands of mail-in and absentee ballots in two big Democratic-leaning counties over alleged irregularities, ruling that he and his campaign waited too long to sue.

Trump, along with Vice President Mike Pence, should have brought their claims much sooner instead of waiting weeks after the Nov. 3 election, the Wisconsin Supreme Court said in a 4-3 decision Monday.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on December 14, 2020, 01:02:41 PM
Quote from: T. D. on December 14, 2020, 12:07:10 PM
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-12-14/wisconsin-supreme-court-rejects-trump-bid-to-invalidate-votes

It was only a 4-3 decision, though, and there were dissenting opinions!

Wisconsin's highest court rejected President Donald Trump's lawsuit seeking to throw out thousands of mail-in and absentee ballots in two big Democratic-leaning counties over alleged irregularities, ruling that he and his campaign waited too long to sue.

Trump, along with Vice President Mike Pence, should have brought their claims much sooner instead of waiting weeks after the Nov. 3 election, the Wisconsin Supreme Court said in a 4-3 decision Monday.


Lawsplain
The suit was dismissed on the grounds of laches (basically, the idea that if you wait too long to sue, you've given up the right to sue) because these claims could have been litigated months ago. Apparently the three dissenters disagreed with that, and thought some absentee ballots should not have been counted, but not enough to alter the result.

So even they wouldn't have given Wisconsin's votes to Trump. Which it was too late to do anyway.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on December 14, 2020, 01:36:28 PM
Quote from: JBS on December 14, 2020, 01:02:41 PM
Lawsplain
The suit was dismissed on the grounds of laches (basically, the idea that if you wait too long to sue, you've given up the right to sue) because these claims could have been litigated months ago. Apparently the three dissenters disagreed with that, and thought some absentee ballots should not have been counted, but not enough to alter the result.

So even they wouldn't have given Wisconsin's votes to Trump. Which it was too late to do anyway.


JBS,

I'm curious as to what you think about these two judges' comments (in bold):

Wisconsin Supreme Court Tosses Trump Bid to Invalidate Votes
By Erik Larson
December 14, 2020, 12:23 PM EST Updated on December 14, 2020, 2:12 PM EST

Wisconsin's highest court rejected President Donald Trump's lawsuit seeking to throw out thousands of mail-in and absentee ballots in two big Democratic-leaning counties over alleged irregularities, ruling that he and his campaign waited too long to sue.

Trump, along with Vice President Mike Pence, should have brought their claims much sooner instead of waiting weeks after the Nov. 3 election, the Wisconsin Supreme Court said in a 4-3 decision Monday.

"The campaign's delay in raising these issues was unreasonable in the extreme" and it was seeking a remedy that would be unfair to election officials, other candidates and voters of the affected counties, the majority said.

The state's high court compared the timing to waiting until after the last play of the last game to start "challenging the rulebook adopted before the season began." The court had rejected the case once before, ruling Trump needed to start the case first before a trial judge, which the president then did.

The ruling comes as President-elect Joe Biden's victory is close to being affirmed by the Electoral College, which votes Monday.

Other lawsuits by the campaign have failed in battleground states across the country, as have several cases brought by GOP allies and a former campaign lawyer who alleged a vast Democratic conspiracy. The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday rejected a Hail Mary suit brought by Texas to flip the election to Trump.

In the Wisconsin ruling, a dissenting judge, Patience Roggensack, blasted the majority for cutting the case short when "a significant portion of the public does not believe" the election was conducted fairly. Roggensack pointed to evidence that a decision by Milwaukee's canvassing board to fix defective witness addresses on some ballots was based on "erroneous advice" that could lead to similar problems being "repeated again and again."

"Once again, four justices on this court cannot be bothered with addressing what the statutes require to assure that absentee ballots are lawfully cast," Roggensack said. "The electorate expects more of us, and we are capable of providing it."


Justice Annette Ziegler, in a separate dissent, said the majority was playing a game of "gotcha" by claiming Trump and Pence had waited too long.

"The majority seems to create a new bright-line rule that the candidates and voters are without recourse and without any notice should the court decide to later conjure up an artificial deadline concluding that it prefers that something would have been done earlier," Ziegler wrote. "That has never been the law, and it should not be today."


In the first-mentioned one, do you think that the case should have been heard?  Perhaps so that the people who don't believe that the election was fair would get to see how hard everyone fought to have a fair election (and overall succeeded there)?  And perhaps what problems can occur when their is miscommunication and misunderstanding by even the best-intentioned of poll workers?  And possibly bringing to light problems that could be then addressed in the future?

Just curious here....  :)

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on December 14, 2020, 02:10:48 PM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on December 14, 2020, 01:36:28 PM

JBS,

I'm curious as to what you think about these two judges' comments (in bold):

Wisconsin Supreme Court Tosses Trump Bid to Invalidate Votes
By Erik Larson
December 14, 2020, 12:23 PM EST Updated on December 14, 2020, 2:12 PM EST

Wisconsin's highest court rejected President Donald Trump's lawsuit seeking to throw out thousands of mail-in and absentee ballots in two big Democratic-leaning counties over alleged irregularities, ruling that he and his campaign waited too long to sue.

Trump, along with Vice President Mike Pence, should have brought their claims much sooner instead of waiting weeks after the Nov. 3 election, the Wisconsin Supreme Court said in a 4-3 decision Monday.

"The campaign's delay in raising these issues was unreasonable in the extreme" and it was seeking a remedy that would be unfair to election officials, other candidates and voters of the affected counties, the majority said.

The state's high court compared the timing to waiting until after the last play of the last game to start "challenging the rulebook adopted before the season began." The court had rejected the case once before, ruling Trump needed to start the case first before a trial judge, which the president then did.

The ruling comes as President-elect Joe Biden's victory is close to being affirmed by the Electoral College, which votes Monday.

Other lawsuits by the campaign have failed in battleground states across the country, as have several cases brought by GOP allies and a former campaign lawyer who alleged a vast Democratic conspiracy. The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday rejected a Hail Mary suit brought by Texas to flip the election to Trump.

In the Wisconsin ruling, a dissenting judge, Patience Roggensack, blasted the majority for cutting the case short when "a significant portion of the public does not believe" the election was conducted fairly. Roggensack pointed to evidence that a decision by Milwaukee's canvassing board to fix defective witness addresses on some ballots was based on "erroneous advice" that could lead to similar problems being "repeated again and again."

"Once again, four justices on this court cannot be bothered with addressing what the statutes require to assure that absentee ballots are lawfully cast," Roggensack said. "The electorate expects more of us, and we are capable of providing it."


Justice Annette Ziegler, in a separate dissent, said the majority was playing a game of "gotcha" by claiming Trump and Pence had waited too long.

"The majority seems to create a new bright-line rule that the candidates and voters are without recourse and without any notice should the court decide to later conjure up an artificial deadline concluding that it prefers that something would have been done earlier," Ziegler wrote. "That has never been the law, and it should not be today."


In the first-mentioned one, do you think that the case should have been heard?  Perhaps so that the people who don't believe that the election was fair would get to see how hard everyone fought to have a fair election (and overall succeeded there)?  And perhaps what problems can occur when their is miscommunication and misunderstanding by even the best-intentioned of poll workers?  And possibly bringing to light problems that could be then addressed in the future?

Just curious here....  :)

PD

The dissenters do make some valid points but the people who think the election was rigged seem immune to the facts, so they wouldn't be convinced by anything now.

The Wisconsin legislature (GOP majority) is fully capable of investigating and legislating any problems they think occurred before the next election.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 14, 2020, 03:01:30 PM
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/14/michigan-rep-mitchell-quits-gop-for-refusal-to-accept-trump-loss-to-biden.html

Rep. Paul Mitchell of Michigan quit the Republican Party on Monday over the GOP's refusal to admit that President Donald Trump lost the election to President-elect Joe Biden.

Mitchell, in a scathing letter to GOP leaders, wrote that Trump's baseless claims alleging widespread ballot fraud, and the Republican Party's tolerance of those claims, threatened "long-term harm to our democracy."

"It is unacceptable for political candidates to treat our election system as though we are a third-world nation and incite distrust of something so basic as the sanctity of our vote," Mitchell wrote to Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy of California.

"Further, it is unacceptable for the president to attack the Supreme Court of the United States because its judges, both liberal and conservative, did not rule with his side or that 'the Court failed him,'" wrote Mitchell, whose letter first was reported by CNN.

Mitchell is retiring from Congress when the current session ends early next year.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 14, 2020, 03:02:19 PM
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/14/attorney-general-william-barr-resigns-effective-dec-23.html
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 14, 2020, 04:53:26 PM
Biden won the electoral college vote.  I thought Trump stole the election.  What gives?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 14, 2020, 06:47:10 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on December 14, 2020, 06:30:42 PMTrump tried to stole the election


No, he did not.  He engaged in various political and legal tactics to possibly change the outcome of the election, and to definitely build a political case for future political activity.  Simply repeating over and over that he tried to steal the election does not make it so. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on December 14, 2020, 09:40:13 PM
Quote from: Todd on December 14, 2020, 06:47:10 PM

No, he did not.  He engaged in various political and legal tactics to possibly change the outcome of the election, and to definitely build a political case for future political activity.  Simply repeating over and over that he tried to steal the election does not make it so.
I love this characterization. Hmm...political tactics. I see. All's fair in love and war. Anyway, I see how this has affected people in my family and feel sad about it; I mean if you'll excuse me. But I guess if people are rube enough to buy the steaks, wear the ties, and join trumper university then more power to him. I know, I know, all pols are bad guys; it's all hypocrisy. Meanwhile, who's really picking your pocket? Uncle Sam, Apple, Amazon? Drain the swamp, etc. etc.
My sister thinks Biden is a communist and the election STILL ain't over. She feels she's been victimized too. Har har.   
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on December 15, 2020, 04:44:53 AM
Quote from: T. D. on December 14, 2020, 03:01:30 PM
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/14/michigan-rep-mitchell-quits-gop-for-refusal-to-accept-trump-loss-to-biden.html

Rep. Paul Mitchell of Michigan quit the Republican Party on Monday over the GOP's refusal to admit that President Donald Trump lost the election to President-elect Joe Biden.

Mitchell, in a scathing letter to GOP leaders, wrote that Trump's baseless claims alleging widespread ballot fraud, and the Republican Party's tolerance of those claims, threatened "long-term harm to our democracy."

"It is unacceptable for political candidates to treat our election system as though we are a third-world nation and incite distrust of something so basic as the sanctity of our vote," Mitchell wrote to Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy of California.

"Further, it is unacceptable for the president to attack the Supreme Court of the United States because its judges, both liberal and conservative, did not rule with his side or that 'the Court failed him,'" wrote Mitchell, whose letter first was reported by CNN.

Mitchell is retiring from Congress when the current session ends early next year.
I heard and read that this morning.  Good for him!  :)

Quote from: T. D. on December 14, 2020, 03:02:19 PM
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/14/attorney-general-william-barr-resigns-effective-dec-23.html
Heard that too, thanks.  Would have loved to have been a fly on the wall when he and Pres. Trump were talking about him resigning!

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on December 15, 2020, 05:04:36 AM
Quote from: milk on December 14, 2020, 09:40:13 PM
I love this characterization. Hmm...political tactics. I see. All's fair in love and war. Anyway, I see how this has affected people in my family and feel sad about it; I mean if you'll excuse me. But I guess if people are rube enough to buy the steaks, wear the ties, and join trumper university then more power to him. I know, I know, all pols are bad guys; it's all hypocrisy. Meanwhile, who's really picking your pocket? Uncle Sam, Apple, Amazon? Drain the swamp, etc. etc.
My sister thinks Biden is a communist and the election STILL ain't over. She feels she's been victimized too. Har har.

Of course, most of us fully understand your post.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 15, 2020, 05:18:06 AM
Mass hysteria is a real phenomenon.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: premont on December 15, 2020, 06:14:08 AM
Quote from: Todd on December 15, 2020, 05:18:06 AM
Mass hysteria is a real phenomenon.

Certainly, and not the least among the Trump voters who believe in voting fraud.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 15, 2020, 07:24:30 AM
     Trump did try to "possibly" change the outcome of an election. People voted, there was an outcome, and he tried to change it. That's one way to describe an attempted election theft. It would have been difficult to try to stuff ballot boxes and Trump had no mechanism to intervene in the actual count as it was happening. He counted on a corrupted judiciary and pressure on state officials to do his dirty work. Perhaps it would have been easier to understand how thefty the effort has been if it succeeded. The pretense of doubt, or any actual doubt, would be inoperable.

     I think I understand why the judges didn't go along. Some are, in the parlance of a different era, straight. Others are reluctant to sacrifice the grand design for the sake of their disposable benefactor.

Quote from: (: premont :) on December 15, 2020, 06:14:08 AM
Certainly, and not the least among the Trump voters who believe in voting fraud.

     The evidence supports the claim that Trump tried to steal the election using "various political and legal tactics to possibly change the outcome".

     The evidence doesn't support the claim that the election was rigged in favor of Biden.

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 15, 2020, 07:53:48 AM
From the failing New York Times: After weeks of declining to recognize Biden's win, Mitch McConnell congratulates him for being the president-elect. (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/15/us/politics/mitch-mcconnell-congratulates-biden.html)

It's official now.  That is because only now is it official.  It is imperative to recognize the fact that the press plays no official or legitimate role in determining election winners.  I suspect mass hysteria concerning Trump's purported attempts to steal the election will continue nonetheless.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on December 15, 2020, 08:00:14 AM
Quote from: Todd on December 14, 2020, 04:53:26 PM
Biden won the electoral college vote.  I thought Trump stole the election.  What gives?

What you thought is apparently your own personal delusion. You were asked to provide evidence that anyone on this forum or elsewhere said Trump stole the election. You couldn't.

Put up or shut up.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 15, 2020, 08:40:59 AM
     Trump wants to jail Georgia Gov. Kemp and Sec. State Ratburger for crimes against Trumpist humanity.

     This juicy bit is from The Hill:

President Trump on Tuesday shared a tweet that declared Georgia's Republican governor and secretary of state would end up in jail for declining to subvert the state's election results in Trump's favor.

The president retweeted Lin Wood, a Georgia-based attorney who has pushed unproven allegations of voter fraud in recent weeks, who targeted Gov. Brian Kemp (R) and Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger (R).

"President Trump @realDonaldTrump is a genuinely good man. He does not really like to fire people. I bet he dislikes putting people in jail, especially 'Republicans,'" Wood tweeted. "He gave @BrianKempGA & @GaSecofState every chance to get it right. They refused. They will soon be going to jail."


     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: flyingdutchman on December 15, 2020, 08:47:53 AM
Of course Trump has done all in his power to steal the election. For example, his putting in DeJoy at the Post Office to destroy and dismantle processing machines. His demanding that ballots mailed be counted only on election day in many states. His pushing for Amy Coney Island to be put on the SCOTUS as a means to "insulate" himself.  Todd saying it didn't happen or it's "just politics" is typical of the rightwing.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 15, 2020, 08:49:28 AM
My prediction has already come true.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: flyingdutchman on December 15, 2020, 08:50:16 AM
Quote from: Todd on December 15, 2020, 07:53:48 AM
From the failing New York Times: After weeks of declining to recognize Biden's win, Mitch McConnell congratulates him for being the president-elect. (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/15/us/politics/mitch-mcconnell-congratulates-biden.html)

It's official now.  That is because only now is it official.  It is imperative to recognize the fact that the press plays no official or legitimate role in determining election winners.  I suspect mass hysteria concerning Trump's purported attempts to steal the election will continue nonetheless.

NOT the case in past elections as ALL previous presidents conceded when the FACTS were clear and the voting data was evident. But keep on believing in your delusions.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 15, 2020, 08:56:14 AM
Quote from: drogulus on December 15, 2020, 08:40:59 AM
     Trump wants to jail Georgia Gov. Kemp and Sec. State Ratburger for crimes against Trumpist humanity.

     This juicy bit is from The Hill:

President Trump on Tuesday shared a tweet that declared Georgia's Republican governor and secretary of state would end up in jail for declining to subvert the state's election results in Trump's favor.

The president retweeted Lin Wood, a Georgia-based attorney who has pushed unproven allegations of voter fraud in recent weeks, who targeted Gov. Brian Kemp (R) and Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger (R).

"President Trump @realDonaldTrump is a genuinely good man. He does not really like to fire people. I bet he dislikes putting people in jail, especially 'Republicans,'" Wood tweeted. "He gave @BrianKempGA & @GaSecofState every chance to get it right. They refused. They will soon be going to jail."


     

I just don't see how anyone can see that as an authoritarian bent.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 15, 2020, 08:57:37 AM
Quote from: flyingdutchman on December 15, 2020, 08:47:53 AM
Of course Trump has done all in his power to steal the election. For example, his putting in DeJoy at the Post Office to destroy and dismantle processing machines. His demanding that ballots mailed be counted only on election day in many states. His pushing for Amy Coney Island to be put on the SCOTUS as a means to "insulate" himself.  Todd saying it didn't happen or it's "just politics" is typical of the rightwing.

Your trying to reason with someone who's  uninterested in reasoning with you.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 15, 2020, 08:59:26 AM
"With Electoral College Vote More Republicans Acknowledge Biden's Victory"

Note the adjective more rather than all.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on December 15, 2020, 09:07:43 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 15, 2020, 08:59:26 AM
"With Electoral College Vote More Republicans Acknowledge Biden's Victory"

Note the adjective more rather than all.
Yeah, it's a sad state of the union that we are currently in.  :(

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 15, 2020, 09:36:38 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on December 15, 2020, 09:28:10 AM
Would you say it's okay to engage in various political and legal tactics to possibly change the outcome of a democratic election? I don't know about you, but I'd say it's not okay and that's why I and many other people call it trying to steal the election.


If the actions are legal, yes.  Indeed, taking legal action in court is entirely appropriate; court is the proper official venue for such actions.  Unsurprisingly, the courts ruled against the Trump administration and his political allies.  People who claim that filing suit in court on electoral matters is tantamount to stealing an election are not just wrong, they are absolutely wrong.  Giving speeches, holding rallies, encouraging allies to engage in lawful actions to pursue aligned political goals are all perfectly acceptable, as well.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 09:36:47 AM
There are three non-American GMGers who have expressed great concern about Trump trying to steal the elections ever since summer.

There is one American GMGer who plainly stated Trump did try to steal the elections.

There is one American GMGer who claims that Trump's not succeeding in stealing the elections is no evidemce that he didn't try it --- and there's another American GMGer who seems to sgree with that.

To claim that no GMGer has ever claimed that Trump would / tried / did steal the elections is counterfactual.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 15, 2020, 09:37:32 AM
Quote from: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 09:36:47 AMcounterfactual.

Spelling?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 09:40:48 AM
Quote from: Todd on December 15, 2020, 09:36:38 AM

If the actions are legal, yes.  Indeed, taking legal action in court is entirely appropriate; court is the proper official venue for such actions.  Unsurprisingly, the courts ruled against the Trump administration and his political allies.  People who claim that filing suit in court on electoral matters is tantamount to stealing an election are not just wrong, they are absolutely wrong. 

I'm greatly surprised that anyone can equate filing a law suit with stealing. Actually, I can't think of anything more legalistic than filing a law suit. "See you in court!" is the essence of justice and the whole point of an independent judiciary, ain't it?

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 09:41:42 AM
Quote from: Todd on December 15, 2020, 09:37:32 AM
Spelling?

Anything wrong with it?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 15, 2020, 09:42:28 AM
Quote from: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 09:40:48 AM"See you in court!" is the essence of justice and the whole point of an independent judiciary, ain't it?

Yes, it is.


Quote from: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 09:41:42 AMAnything wrong with it?

No.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 15, 2020, 09:58:26 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on December 15, 2020, 09:07:43 AM
Yeah, it's a sad state of the union that we are currently in.  :(

PD

Never Forget the Republicans Who Held Fast (https://thebulwark.com/never-forget-the-republicans-who-held-fast/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: flyingdutchman on December 15, 2020, 10:39:46 AM
Filing lawsuits are NOT part of stealing the election, as long as the lawsuits have some basis in reality. Filing frivolous lawsuits based on bogus claims of conspiracy could lead to disbarment, and rightfully so. Further, we know that the lawsuits were filed to satiate Trump
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 15, 2020, 10:41:50 AM
Quote from: flyingdutchman on December 15, 2020, 10:39:46 AM
Filing lawsuits are NOT part of stealing the election, as long as the lawsuits have some basis in reality. Filing frivolous lawsuits based on bogus claims of conspiracy could lead to disbarment, and rightfully so. Further, we know that the lawsuits were filed to satiate Trump

So, both devoid of any legal merit, and performative bullshittery.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 15, 2020, 10:43:41 AM
Quote from: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 09:36:47 AM


To claim that no GMGer has ever claimed that Trump would / tried / did steal the elections is counterfactual.

     Trump didn't steal the election. He tried and failed. Like autocrats often do, he tried to get the courts to help him do it. Trump thought the courts belonged to him and having the judges in his pocket would mean that the law would be what judges say, and the theft would be legal in that restricted sense. The courts didn't say what he wanted him to say about what the law is. They would not pervert justice for him.

     It might occur to you that democratic governments are overthrown by courts and legislatures, with or without the support of paramilitary forces, the police or election officials. You can't rely on executives or legislatures at the state level to fold when only itty bitty mobs show up to help them see reason.

     Time ran out on Trump, so he couldn't act slowly like Orban has done. His efforts were spasmodic and rushed, his allies often unreliable and cowardly. The judges ran away en masse. Shame on them! They could have held the line and given the cover of legality to everything Trump wanted. That's how it's done.

     Trump made many mistakes, but one whopper stands out. He outsourced judge selection to conservatives in the party, while imagining that he was buying personal loyalty. That turned out to be wrong. Trump was a terrible Pauly. You're supposed to know you bought the judge, not just assume you did.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 15, 2020, 10:47:12 AM
Quote from: drogulus on December 15, 2020, 10:43:41 AM
     Trump didn't steal the election. He tried and failed.

Yes, that is the fact.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 15, 2020, 10:50:13 AM
88% of Republican elected officials out of their native blend of cynicism and cowardice, are forbearing to acknowledge reality.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 15, 2020, 10:52:39 AM
Quote from: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 09:36:47 AM
There are three non-American GMGers who have expressed great concern about Trump trying to steal the elections ever since summer.

There is one American GMGer who plainly stated Trump did try to steal the elections.

There is one American GMGer who claims that Trump's not succeeding in stealing the elections is no evidemce that he didn't try it --- and there's another American GMGer who seems to sgree with that.

To claim that no GMGer has ever claimed that Trump would / tried / did steal the elections is counterfactual.

This is all beside the point; unless your point is salving Huggy Bear's ego.

It's not everybody's idea of a good time, but have at it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 11:23:36 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 15, 2020, 10:52:39 AM
This is all beside the point;

Is it really, Karl? One American GMGer's point was that no GMGer has ever said Trump would / tried to / did steal the elections. I just pointed out he's wrong.

QuoteIt's not everybody's idea of a good time, but have at it.

Let me put it this way: Trump's lawsuits were laughed off courts one after another, including the SCOTUS, in which if I remember correctly a majority of judges were nominated by none other than himself. I don't know about you, Karl, but for me this is clear and irrefutable evidence that the US judiciary is truly and genuinely independent, and thinking about that I'm really having a good time.

Now, I only wish he pushed his idiocy and madness to the point of refusing to leave the White House past noon on January, 20 2021 and therefore offering the world the live show of being forcefully evicted, clear and irrefutable evidence that the US law enforcement is also truly and genuinely independent. I'm having a good time already thinking about it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 15, 2020, 11:31:08 AM
Bill Galston (I think): The Republican Party is now actively cultivating a kind of citizen, and it is not a citizen of a democracy. It is not a given in human history that human beings just automatically do the right thing, even when it's costly, and you have to cultivate people who are willing, you have to reward acts of honorable sacrifice for the good of the political community. And right now Republicans are not doing that, they are doing the opposite: they are deliberately saying and doing idiotic, incredibly irresponsible things in order to get the cheers of (I'll be honest) an ignorant mob and in doing that, they're making the mob more ignorant and more hateful, and this is happening and repeating itself in a kind of death spiral every single day. These are people we have to keep living with, they're our fellow citizens who are going to keep voting, who are gonna protest who are going to be putting pressure on their elected officials going forward, and that's where it's scary. I don't know if, as [N.] said, that the exact scenario will be unfolding again in the future like it has this time without actually Trump on the scene, but other bad things can happen when such a significant chunk of the electorate is buying into this kind of civic poison that is now circulating around the country....
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 15, 2020, 12:24:57 PM
Great neologism I just heard: griftocracy
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 15, 2020, 12:29:29 PM
Bill Barr? He gone.

Barr began the Year of Our Lord 2016 as a well respected member of the conservative legal establishment. He concludes 2020 with his reputation destroyed, destined to be remembered as the most dishonorable attorney general in a century. The fact that he tried to salvage his legacy in the closing weeks of his tenure looks less like a man standing up and more like Meat Loaf.

Everyone Trump Touches Dies: The List

He revealed people for what they really were. (https://thetriad.thebulwark.com/p/everyone-trump-touches-dies-the-list)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on December 15, 2020, 12:43:11 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 15, 2020, 09:58:26 AM
Never Forget the Republicans Who Held Fast (https://thebulwark.com/never-forget-the-republicans-who-held-fast/)
Yes, I am thankful for those who called it as they saw it--like Mitt Romney.  Wish that there had been many more, but am grateful for and proud of and appreciative of those who called it what it was and took a stand.  :)

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 15, 2020, 01:05:23 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 11:23:36 AMNow, I only wish he pushed his idiocy and madness to the point of refusing to leave the White House past noon on January, 20 2021 and therefore offering the world the live show of being forcefully evicted, clear and irrefutable evidence that the US law enforcement is also truly and genuinely independent. I'm having a good time already thinking about it.

Only then could it be said of Trump that he tried to steal the election.  And really, it would just be trespassing.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 01:14:36 PM
Quote from: Todd on December 15, 2020, 01:05:23 PM
Only then could it be said of Trump that he tried to steal the election.  And really, it would just be trespassing.

Hah!  :D

Still, I'd just love the whole show! Wouldn't you?  ;)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 15, 2020, 01:31:49 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 01:14:36 PM
Hah!  :D

Still, I'd just love the whole show! Wouldn't you?  ;)


Yes.  Imagine the ratings.  They would be yuge.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 01:38:37 PM
Quote from: Todd on December 15, 2020, 01:31:49 PM

Yes.  Imagine the ratings.  They would be yuge.

Forget about the ratings. It would show urbi et orbi that the most maligned Western country in the world (sic!) can still teach a lesson or two to the most lauded and applauded Western countries in the world (sic!).  8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 15, 2020, 01:49:37 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on December 15, 2020, 01:44:54 PM
Trump's team (and supporters) did much more than took legal action in court. They pressured states to throw away votes etc. Well, now we know Republicans don't believe in the USA and it's democratic system. They just want their "king" in power. They want effectively monarchy. Make America Monarchy Again (MAMA) is their new thing.


I would need to know which specific statutes were violated in the course of the political discussions.  Applying pressure - which is as nebulous a phrase as exists - is not always illegal.  In fact, it's almost always legal.  If it is legal, it is fine.  No one wants a king, either, but I guess there may be some Americans who might still be agitated by such language.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 02:36:19 PM
Quote from: Todd on December 15, 2020, 01:49:37 PM
If it is legal, it is fine. 

How anyone could disagree with this is beyond me.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on December 15, 2020, 02:45:29 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 02:36:19 PM
How anyone could disagree with this is beyond me.

Perhaps if you took the time to seriously consider the replies you've had here instead of just jumping on Todd's That's Entertainment snark bandwagon.

Its clear from the way you're misrepresenting the ongoing conversation that you're barely reading but rather assuming what's being said.

please reread this - slowly, and without itching to mock:

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 15, 2020, 11:31:08 AM
Bill Galston (I think): The Republican Party is now actively cultivating a kind of citizen, and it is not a citizen of a democracy. It is not a given in human history that human beings just automatically do the right thing, even when it's costly, and you have to cultivate people who are willing, you have to reward acts of honorable sacrifice for the good of the political community. And right now Republicans are not doing that, they are doing the opposite: they are deliberately saying and doing idiotic, incredibly irresponsible things in order to get the cheers of (I'll be honest) an ignorant mob and in doing that, they're making the mob more ignorant and more hateful, and this is happening and repeating itself in a kind of death spiral every single day. These are people we have to keep living with, they're our fellow citizens who are going to keep voting, who are gonna protest who are going to be putting pressure on their elected officials going forward, and that's where it's scary. I don't know if, as [N.] said, that the exact scenario will be unfolding again in the future like it has this time without actually Trump on the scene, but other bad things can happen when such a significant chunk of the electorate is buying into this kind of civic poison that is now circulating around the country....
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 15, 2020, 02:52:59 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 02:36:19 PM
How anyone could disagree with this is beyond me.


Two main ways.  First is to insinuate that the actions were illegal, or to flatly lie about the legality of various presumably nefarious deeds.  This is very common.  Someone did something or other.  It had to be illegal because it had to be illegal.  Sort of like Trump and teams' claims of massive voter fraud.  It's balderdash.  Trump's leftist critics do the same thing every day of the week.  They will deny it of course.  Second is to lament something called "norms".  You see, these "norms" - or non-constitutional, non-statutory, non-mandatory forms of behavior - are critical parts of democracy.  Like conceding.  Trump did not concede.  Conceding is the "norm".  Of course, there is no Constitutional or statutory requirement to concede, but that does not matter.  Also, releasing tax returns is a "norm", not a legal requirement.  Surely you remember the multiple brouhahas about that.  Yes, there is justice above law, and such forth.

There are a couple quite delightful aspects of appealing to "norms".  First is the intrinsically conservative nature of such appeals.  This appears to be lost on many people who so revere "norms" now.  Second is the intrinsically fluid definition of "norms".  What are these "norms", who determined what they are, how, and why?  No one actually cares, of course.  The fluid, hopelessly nebulous nature of "norms" means that people can make them mean what they want them to mean, when they want to, and wield claims of normlessness wantonly and in an entirely unprincipled and purely partisan manner.  Trump's leftist critics do this every day of the week.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 02:59:23 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on December 15, 2020, 02:45:29 PM
Perhaps if you took the time to seriously consider the replies you've had here instead of just jumping on Todd's That's Entertainment snark bandwagon.

Its clear from the way you're misrepresenting the ongoing conversation that you're barely reading but rather assuming what's being said.

please reread this - slowly, and without itching to mock:

Bill Galston (I think): The Republican Party is now actively cultivating a kind of citizen, and it is not a citizen of a democracy. It is not a given in human history that human beings just automatically do the right thing, even when it's costly, and you have to cultivate people who are willing, you have to reward acts of honorable sacrifice for the good of the political community. And right now Republicans are not doing that, they are doing the opposite: they are deliberately saying and doing idiotic, incredibly irresponsible things in order to get the cheers of (I'll be honest) an ignorant mob and in doing that, they're making the mob more ignorant and more hateful, and this is happening and repeating itself in a kind of death spiral every single day. These are people we have to keep living with, they're our fellow citizens who are going to keep voting, who are gonna protest who are going to be putting pressure on their elected officials going forward, and that's where it's scary. I don't know if, as [N.] said, that the exact scenario will be unfolding again in the future like it has this time without actually Trump on the scene, but other bad things can happen when such a significant chunk of the electorate is buying into this kind of civic poison that is now circulating around the country....

My educated guess is that if at any time in the US history I had replaced Republican with Democrat in the above, or even kept it Republican,  I'd have still had a somewhat valid point --- especially if I were someone as partisan as Bill Galston.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 15, 2020, 03:04:10 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on December 15, 2020, 03:00:49 PMHad votes been thrown away that would have been illegal.

What if a court ordered it?

I get it, people will forever insist that Trump and his supporters tried to steal the election.  They did not. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 03:06:07 PM
Quote from: Todd on December 15, 2020, 02:52:59 PM

Two main ways.  First is to insinuate that the actions were illegal, or to flatly lie about the legality of various presumably nefarious deeds.  This is very common.  Someone did something or other.  It had to be illegal because it had to be illegal.  Sort of like Trump and teams' claims of massive voter fraud.  It's balderdash.  Trump's leftist critics do the same thing every day of the week.  They will deny it of course.  Second is to lament something called "norms".  You see, these "norms" - or non-constitutional, non-statutory, non-mandatory forms of behavior - are critical parts of democracy.  Like conceding.  Trump did not concede.  Conceding is the "norm".  Of course, there is no Constitutional or statutory requirement to concede, but that does not matter.  Also, releasing tax returns is a "norm", not a legal requirement.  Surely you remember the multiple brouhahas about that.  Yes, there is justice above law, and such forth.

There are a couple quite delightful aspects of appealing to "norms".  First is the intrinsically conservative nature of such appeals.  This appears to be lost on many people who so revere "norms" now.  Second is the intrinsically fluid definition of "norms".  What are these "norms", who determined what they are, how, and why?  No one actually cares, of course.  The fluid, hopelessly nebulous nature of "norms" means that people can make them mean what they want them to mean, when they want to, and wield claims of normlessness wantonly and in an entirely unprincipled and purely partisan manner.  Trump's leftist critics do this every day of the week.

Hereby I wholeheartedly agree with Huggy Bear aka Diner Cop and I beg all whom it might concern to identify me by those nicknames as well, because I resent and reject each and any discrimination.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 15, 2020, 03:07:34 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on December 15, 2020, 03:04:29 PMNo, it just legal.

That is literally the only thing that matters.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 03:14:15 PM
Trump legally challenged the result of the elections.

Trump legally lost and will be legally replaced by Joe Biden

Then Trump is a Fascist.

Ummmm, okay.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on December 15, 2020, 03:27:13 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 03:06:07 PM
Hereby I wholeheartedly agree with Huggy Bear aka Diner Cop and I beg all whom it might concern to identify me by those nicknames as well, because I resent and reject each and any discrimination.

Lets try something else: Trump told a group of advisers in the Oval Office that he wanted to shoot migrants dead as they approached the border. The advisers pushed back. He then suggested just shooting the in the legs as they approached. They pushed back on that. (he also suggested building a moat and filling it with snakes and alligators and sharpening the points at the top of the wall so people would be impaled on it).

If he or his lawyers had found come precedent of vaguely defined emergency powers to give such an order the figleaf of legality would you be here saying that the law has spoken and if its legal then its legal. Or would you think both that the law had been perverted and also that there were extra-legal considerations that call such a position into question?

Because likewise with the current problem: the extra-legal consideration of undermining faith in fair and free elections and sowing dissent and potential violence and creating the idea that winning both the popular and electoral votes are essentially meaningless as long as you have the best lawyers are what you and Todd are stubbornly refusing to address.

You're divorcing the law from any questions of jurisprudence, of asking why we have laws in the first place and what they are fundamentally meant to be protecting, making it merely a game that one team may play better - or more cynically - than another.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 03:34:26 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on December 15, 2020, 03:27:13 PM
Lets try something else:
.

Okay, let's try isomething else. I'm game.

QuoteTrump told a group of advisers in the Oval Office that he wanted to shoot migrants dead as they approached the border.

Did he?

If yes, I'm game, If  no, I'm not.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on December 15, 2020, 03:35:37 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 03:34:26 PM
.

Okay, let's try isomething else. I'm game.

Did he?

If yes, I'm game, If  no, I'm not.

Yes. He did.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 03:37:22 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on December 15, 2020, 03:35:37 PM
Yes. He did.

I'm really willing to consider the source. Link, please .

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 03:43:56 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on December 15, 2020, 03:27:13 PM
why we have laws in the first place

We? As far as I know you are not American. Why Americans have laws in the first place is beyond your power to answer, no offense meant.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 03:56:15 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on December 15, 2020, 03:27:13 PM
the extra-legal consideration

There is  no extra-legal consideration when judging a case, there's only the law.

Extra-legal consideration when judging a case were typical of Communism: why, of course, John Doe did not break any law, neverthless he was born in a privileged class, therefore his very existence is a danger to the working class, therefore he must be sentenced to 10 years of prsion, extra-legal consideration duly applied.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on December 15, 2020, 03:57:17 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 03:37:22 PM
I'm really willing to consider the source. Link, please .

Took a minute to go back and find. It was in an interview with Miles Taylor, the former chief of staff at the Department of Homeland Security in the New Abnormal podcast:

https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9yc3MuYWNhc3QuY29tL3RoZS1uZXctYWJub3JtYWw/episode/NjgwNzdkOTgtNDlhMC00NDhiLWE4M2ItMzBiYzU2YWVlZjZj?sa=X&ved=0CAUQkfYCahcKEwigrLTModHtAhUAAAAAHQAAAAAQAw&hl=en-NZ

The "shooting in the leg" part seems much better documented and googleable, answer that one, if you;d prefer, it doesn't change the question

Shoot Migrants' Legs, Build Alligator Moat: Behind Trump's Ideas for Border (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/01/us/politics/trump-border-wars.html)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on December 15, 2020, 03:59:57 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 03:56:15 PM
There is  no extra-legal consideration when judging a case, there's only the law.


Then forget it. You're not going to try and I don't know why I bothered.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 04:06:34 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on December 15, 2020, 03:57:17 PM
https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9yc3MuYWNhc3QuY29tL3RoZS1uZXctYWJub3JtYWw/episode/NjgwNzdkOTgtNDlhMC00NDhiLWE4M2ItMzBiYzU2YWVlZjZj?sa=X&ved=0CAUQkfYCahcKEwigrLTModHtAhUAAAAAHQAAAAAQAw&hl=en-NZ

Good journalism practice requires at least three independent sources to corroborate a news. You gave me one. Which are the other two?

Really, Mister: White House Insider: Trump Wanted to 'Maim' Immigrants? Is this the best you can do? No The New York Times? No The Guardian? No The Atlantic? Is it possible at all that your sources be untrustful?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 04:09:44 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on December 15, 2020, 03:59:57 PM
Then forget it. You're not going to try and I don't know why I bothered.

Oh, but please illuminate me: which extra-legal considerations are relevant when considering Law X and its possibl;e breaking. I'm all ears.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on December 15, 2020, 04:11:04 PM
I'm not playing this game.

My post - as I'm sure you're aware - is meant to ask you. Can trump, or anyone, do anything formerly accepted as illegal and even unethical if they can rewrite the law to have a figleaf of legality.

If you're not going to answer that question then don't bother answering at all.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 04:16:24 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on December 15, 2020, 04:11:04 PM
Can trump, or anyone, do anything formerly accepted as illegal and even unethical if they can rewrite the law to have a figleaf of legality.

No, they certainly can't do anything illegal and they certainly can't rewrite the law.

Quote from: SimonNZ on December 15, 2020, 04:11:04 PM
If you're not going to answer that question then don't bother answering at all.

I just answered that question.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 15, 2020, 04:18:17 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 03:34:26 PMDid he?

I assume he did.  Such behavior contributed to his defeat.  It was legal.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 04:27:14 PM
It boggles my mind, really. Either we're tallking about the law, ie legal considerations, or we're talking about something other than the law, ie extra-legal considerations. Tertium non datur.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 04:36:25 PM
Quote from: Todd on December 15, 2020, 04:18:17 PM
I assume he did. 

I assume he didn't. Sue me, see you in court!

Quote
Such behavior contributed to his defeat. 

Absolutely.

Quote
It was legal.

I assume it was.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 15, 2020, 04:40:05 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 04:27:14 PM
It boggles my mind, really. Either we're tallking about the law, ie legal considerations, or we're talking about something other than the law, ie extra-legal considerations. Tertium non datur.

Once one recognizes that virtue signaling is endemic to the web, one understands that people conflate simple, basic concepts every single day of the week.  Often purposively.


Quote from: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 04:36:25 PMI assume he didn't. Sue me, see you in court!

I would contact my attorney tomorrow, but it would be wasted money since you are not an American.


Quote from: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 04:36:25 PMI assume it was.

It definitely was.  See the first part of my post.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on December 15, 2020, 04:40:31 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 04:27:14 PM
It boggles my mind, really. Either we're tallking about the law, ie legal considerations, or we're talking about something other than the law, ie extra-legal considerations. Tertium non datur.

We're talking - well I am, you and Todd are pointedly not - about how the use of the law so transparently cynically a manner effects people's faith in institutions, in government and in elections in the long run, as well as stoking division and violence.

You are in such a rush to mock that you have to ask what extra-legal considerations might be that you refuse to read this. It was in my previous post and has been put forward time and again in the posts of others.


Now: if you respond to this post with sarcasm I fucking swear I will never speak to you again. You'll be merely another Todd and no longer worth rising to the bait.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 04:41:38 PM
There are lots  of people who can't distinguish between legality and morality, nay, who would like legality and morality be exactly the same --- thanks God they are a minority.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on December 15, 2020, 04:42:36 PM
Fuck off, then.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 04:48:08 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on December 15, 2020, 04:42:36 PM
Fuck off, then.

So much for the rationality and the caring of the Left --- to which I assume you nominally belong.

I suppose Que will delete your post and mine in not time --- I just hope you'll read it before he does.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 15, 2020, 04:57:26 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 04:48:08 PM
So much for the rationality and the caring of the Left --- to which I assume you nominally belong.

I suppose Que will delete your post and mine in not time --- I just hope you'll read it before he does.


Goodness, how can you possibly recover from such an attack?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 05:00:50 PM
Quote from: Todd on December 15, 2020, 04:57:26 PM

Goodness, how can you possibly recover from such an attack?

I'm devastated.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on December 15, 2020, 05:06:54 PM
For someone living in Romania the US might look like a beacon of democracy, but for people living in countries such as New-Zealand and Finland it is certainly not. Just 1 % of the stuff that has happened in this presidental election the past 6 weeks or so would be totally unthinkable in Finland and I am pretty sure the same goes for New-Zealand. Nobody questions the results of election in my country. Everybody trusts the votes are counted correctly and accept the result without taking cases to courts weeks after the election. People may not like the results, but they respect the outcome and demoractic process. From this kind of perspective this presidental election in the US was quite lunatic and alarming even if the outcome is the correct one in the end.

This is not only about the legal stuff. This is about how much the people trust in the system.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 05:14:30 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on December 15, 2020, 05:06:54 PM
Nobody questions the results of election in my country. Everybody trusts the votes are counted correctly and accept the result without taking cases to courts weeks after the election.

Too bad. They should. The true test of an independent judiciary is legally being challenged against, and upholding the result of, the latest elections. When was the last time thw Finnish judiciary upheld the latest elections against a legal challenge?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 05:20:47 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on December 15, 2020, 05:06:54 PM
For someone living in Romania the US might look like a beacon of democracy, but for people living in countries such as New-Zealand and Finland it is certainly not.

I couldn''t care less about democracy in USA, Finland or New Zealand.

All I care about is NATO being up and running.

Ie, all I care about is USA being up and running.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 15, 2020, 05:22:08 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 02:59:23 PM
Bill Galston (I think): The Republican Party is now actively cultivating a kind of citizen, and it is not a citizen of a democracy. It is not a given in human history that human beings just automatically do the right thing, even when it's costly, and you have to cultivate people who are willing, you have to reward acts of honorable sacrifice for the good of the political community. And right now Republicans are not doing that, they are doing the opposite: they are deliberately saying and doing idiotic, incredibly irresponsible things in order to get the cheers of (I'll be honest) an ignorant mob and in doing that, they're making the mob more ignorant and more hateful, and this is happening and repeating itself in a kind of death spiral every single day. These are people we have to keep living with, they're our fellow citizens who are going to keep voting, who are gonna protest who are going to be putting pressure on their elected officials going forward, and that's where it's scary. I don't know if, as [N.] said, that the exact scenario will be unfolding again in the future like it has this time without actually Trump on the scene, but other bad things can happen when such a significant chunk of the electorate is buying into this kind of civic poison that is now circulating around the country....

My educated guess is that if at any time in the US history I had replaced Republican with Democrat in the above, or even kept it Republican,  I'd have still had a somewhat valid point --- especially if I were someone as partisan as Bill Galston.



Where do you learn that Bill Galston is partisan, please?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 15, 2020, 05:24:58 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on December 15, 2020, 04:40:31 PM
We're talking - well I am, you and Todd are pointedly not - about how the use of the law so transparently cynically a manner effects people's faith in institutions, in government and in elections in the long run, as well as stoking division and violence.

You are in such a rush to mock that you have to ask what extra-legal considerations might be that you refuse to read this. It was in my previous post and has been put forward time and again in the posts of others.


Now: if you respond to this post with sarcasm I fucking swear I will never speak to you again. You'll be merely another Todd and no longer worth rising to the bait.

It's one of the minor unsavory mysteries to me that Andrei gives himself to playing Gracie to Todd's impoverished George Burns.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 15, 2020, 05:25:48 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 05:20:47 PMIe, all I care about is USA being up and running.


You win!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on December 15, 2020, 05:26:48 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 05:14:30 PM
Too bad. They should. The true test of an independent judiciary is legally being challenged against, and upholding the result of, the latest elections. When was the last time thw Finnish judiciary upheld the latest elections against a legal challenge?

The extreme to which Trump is taking things is unprecedented, but election challenges in court are part of our system, especially in close elections. There are IIRC two Congressional seats which have yet to be decided, one in Iowa and one in New York, because very slim margins (I think the difference in Iowa was about 10 votes) have made recounts and a court challenge necessary. The one in New York may not be decided until the spring.

The American view of election officials is trust but verify.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 05:29:10 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 15, 2020, 05:22:08 PM
Where do you learn that Bill Galston is partisan, please?

Here: :https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Galston (http://:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Galston)

QuoteHe was deputy assistant for domestic policy to U.S. President Bill Clinton (January 1993 – May 1995).[1][7][9] He has also been employed by the presidential campaigns of Al Gore (1988, 2000),[11][12] Walter Mondale,[12] and John B. Anderson.[13]
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 05:30:43 PM
Quote from: Todd on December 15, 2020, 05:25:48 PM

You win!

8) 8) 8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 05:35:10 PM
Quote from: JBS on December 15, 2020, 05:26:48 PM
The extreme to which Trump is taking things is unprecedented,

Is it illegal? Is it unconstitutional?

Quotebut election challenges in court are part of our system, especially in close elections.

Say whaaaat?

QuoteThere are IIRC two Congressional seats which have yet to be decided, one in Iowa and one in New York, because very slim margins (I think the difference in Iowa was about 10 votes) have made recounts and a court challenge necessary. The one in New York may not be decided until the spring.

Unlike Finland or New Zealand, right?

QuoteThe American view of election officials is trust but verify.

Most wise.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 05:48:14 PM
Quote from: Todd on December 15, 2020, 05:37:37 PM

Outstanding.  You are being asked - seriously, apparently - how you knew a partisan polemicist was partisan.  A first, even for GMG!

;D

I know Clinton, Gore and Mondale. John B. Anderson is an unknown quantity to me., though.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on December 15, 2020, 07:13:18 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 05:48:14 PM
;D

I know Clinton, Gore and Mondale. John B. Anderson is an unknown quantity to me., though.

True to my quixotic nature, he was the first person for whom I cast my ballot in a Presidential election

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_B._Anderson
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 15, 2020, 07:48:45 PM

     Look, the election is truly over. Vladdy congratulated Biden, and Mitch followed soon after.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on December 16, 2020, 03:01:15 AM
As an aside, is anyone else here having problems watching video clips on CNN at the moment?  I was trying to watch the one about McConnell a few minutes ago...tried adjusting settings for this website...was able to see an ad then, but even though it says "now playing", the screen was black.

PD

EDIT:  Never mind...it's working now.  :)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on December 16, 2020, 03:19:53 AM
Quote from: Todd on December 15, 2020, 07:53:48 AM
From the failing New York Times: After weeks of declining to recognize Biden's win, Mitch McConnell congratulates him for being the president-elect. (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/15/us/politics/mitch-mcconnell-congratulates-biden.html)

It's official now.  That is because only now is it official.  It is imperative to recognize the fact that the press plays no official or legitimate role in determining election winners.  I suspect mass hysteria concerning Trump's purported attempts to steal the election will continue nonetheless.

https://www.npr.org/2020/12/16/946995614/ex-houston-police-officer-charged-in-attack-over-bogus-election-fraud-plot?ft=nprml&f=139482413



Ex-Houston Police Officer Charged In Attack Over Bogus Election Fraud Plot

..Aguirre said he was working for the group Liberty Center for God and Country when on Oct. 19 he pulled a gun on a man who he believed was the mastermind of the scheme...Harris County District Attorney Kim Ogg said Aguirre "crossed the line from dirty politics to commission of a violent crime and we are lucky no one was killed."...Aguirre's scheme was reportedly part of a paid investigation by the right-wing Liberty Center group, whose CEO is Republican activist Steven Hotze. It was later discovered that Aguirre was paid $266,400 by this organization for this involvement.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on December 17, 2020, 04:32:24 AM
McConnell getting much of what he wants in emerging relief deal (https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/530594-mcconnell-getting-much-of-what-he-wants-in-emerging-relief-deal)

St Addison holds the line.  Dems had better fight real tough in Georgia to show him who's boss next year.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 17, 2020, 07:31:55 AM
The Dangerous Idolatry of Christian Trumpism

We can pray peace will prevail, but we'd be fools to presume it will.
(https://frenchpress.thedispatch.com/p/the-dangerous-idolatry-of-christian)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 17, 2020, 07:35:11 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 17, 2020, 07:31:55 AM
The Dangerous Idolatry of Christian Trumpism

We can pray peace will prevail, but we'd be fools to presume it will.
(https://frenchpress.thedispatch.com/p/the-dangerous-idolatry-of-christian)

As for hysteria:

And here's what he says about Americans who disagree, who believe that Trump lost the election:

Everybody who is not hopped up about this ... you are the Germans that looked the other way when Hitler was preparing to do what he was preparing to do. Unfortunately, I don't see how you can see it any other way.

That's right, you're like the Germans who didn't object to the rise of Hitler. And is this deep conviction built on unassailable evidence of mass fraud? No, not at all. He doesn't even really care about the courts:

So who cares what I can prove in the courts? This is right. This happened, and I am going to do anything I can to uncover this horror, this evil.

Later he says, "We need to fight to the death, to the last drop of blood, because it's worth it."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 18, 2020, 05:55:29 AM
"Biden-stole-the-election" hysteria after-market:

"What are Republican members of Congress so scared about that they're still clinging to crazy conspiracy theories about election fraud, even after the Supreme Court has acted and the electoral college has voted? Is there a path back to sanity and civility after the inauguration of President-elect Joe Biden?

Unfortunately, the road ahead still seems blocked — and not just by President Trump. Republican House members tell me there's a rage in their districts among grass-roots GOP voters who believe, without evidence, that the system is rigged and the election was stolen by Biden."

RTWT here (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/republicans-road-ahead-is-still-blocked--and-not-just-by-trump/2020/12/17/36b5927c-40aa-11eb-8bc0-ae155bee4aff_story.html).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 18, 2020, 07:04:36 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 18, 2020, 05:55:29 AM
"Biden-stole-the-election" hysteria after-market:

"What are Republican members of Congress so scared about that they're still clinging to crazy conspiracy theories about election fraud, even after the Supreme Court has acted and the electoral college has voted? Is there a path back to sanity and civility after the inauguration of President-elect Joe Biden?

Unfortunately, the road ahead still seems blocked — and not just by President Trump. Republican House members tell me there's a rage in their districts among grass-roots GOP voters who believe, without evidence, that the system is rigged and the election was stolen by Biden."

RTWT here (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/republicans-road-ahead-is-still-blocked--and-not-just-by-trump/2020/12/17/36b5927c-40aa-11eb-8bc0-ae155bee4aff_story.html).

Spineless to begin with, now they're in thrall to the whackjobs.


"The message is to move on, but it's hard for Republicans to hear when they're hunkered down — still intimidated by Trump and frightened by an angry base that seems to have lost the ability to separate election fact from fiction."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 18, 2020, 07:22:08 AM
Quote from: Florestan on December 15, 2020, 05:35:10 PM
Is it illegal? Is it unconstitutional?


     When despotic aspirants use courts to steal/overturn/reverse elections the question of legality comes up. As often as not democratic systems are legally killed. It's the best way to do it if you don't have total control over the organs of state security and the military. Trump doesn't have control and he knows the state is still deep enough to resist full throttle banana-ism.

     Trump thought he could use the legal system against itself and failed for the reason I gave. Ideological zealotry is not personal loyalty.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on December 18, 2020, 09:08:21 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 18, 2020, 05:55:29 AM
"Biden-stole-the-election" hysteria after-market:

"What are Republican members of Congress so scared about that they're still clinging to crazy conspiracy theories about election fraud, even after the Supreme Court has acted and the electoral college has voted? Is there a path back to sanity and civility after the inauguration of President-elect Joe Biden?

Unfortunately, the road ahead still seems blocked — and not just by President Trump. Republican House members tell me there's a rage in their districts among grass-roots GOP voters who believe, without evidence, that the system is rigged and the election was stolen by Biden."

RTWT here (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/republicans-road-ahead-is-still-blocked--and-not-just-by-trump/2020/12/17/36b5927c-40aa-11eb-8bc0-ae155bee4aff_story.html).

The system IS rigged, but not by Biden, but by the oligarchs, the establishment, the rich. For the most part they are fine with either Trump or Biden being the president as long as a real lefty doesn't get into the White House. Bernie Sanders not being the president is the REAL rigging. The corporate media does good job at keeping Americans as clueless as possible about that.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 18, 2020, 09:17:58 AM
Quote from: drogulus on December 18, 2020, 07:22:08 AM
     When despotic aspirants use courts to steal/overturn/reverse elections the question of legality comes up. As often as not democratic systems are legally killed. It's the best way to do it if you don't have total control over the organs of state security and the military. Trump doesn't have control and he knows the state is still deep enough to resist full throttle banana-ism.

     Trump thought he could use the legal system against itself and failed for the reason I gave. Ideological zealotry is not personal loyalty.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/18/politics/tommy-tuberville-electoral-college-reaction/index.html
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on December 18, 2020, 01:34:34 PM
just catching up with this now:

Hacking campaign targeted US energy, treasury and commerce agencies
'Significant and ongoing' cyber attack, suspected to be the work of Russia, poses a grave risk to 'critical infrastructure entities' as well (https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/dec/17/us-government-cyber-attack-hack-russia)

"The US government continues to reel from a large and sophisticated hacking campaign that affected top federal agencies, including the energy department, the treasury and commerce departments, and is even said to have targeted the agency responsible for the country's nuclear weapons stockpile.

Authorities expressed increasing alarm over the hack, suspected to be the work of Russia, warning that it poses "a grave risk" to federal, state and local governments, as well as "critical infrastructure entities".

In a statement on Thursday, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (Cisa) also warned that it will be difficult to remove the malware inserted through network software.

"Removing this threat actor from compromised environments will be highly complex and challenging for organizations," the agency said.

Thursday's comments were the most detailed yet from the agency since reports of the hack emerged over the weekend. The US government on Wednesday confirmed that an operation by elite hackers affected its networks and said the attack was "significant and ongoing".

The true scale of the breach is still unknown, but looks to have extended beyond the US government. On Thursday, Reuters reported that Microsoft was also hacked as part of the suspected Russian campaign, according to people familiar with the matter.

SolarWinds, the company behind the software targeted by hackers, said earlier this week that up to 18,000 of its more than 300,000 customers had downloaded the compromised software.

Hackers believed to be working for Russia introduced malware into SolarWind's popular network safety tool called Orion, which is used by numerous government agencies and large corporations.

The hack began as early as March, when malicious code was snuck into updates to Orion, which monitors the computer networks of businesses and governments for outages.

That malware gave the hackers remote access to an organization's networks, including internal emails. The content the hackers sought to steal – and how successful they were – remains unclear.

Cisa said it was continuing to analyze the other avenues used by the attackers. So far, the hackers are known to have at least monitored email or other data within the US departments of defense, state, treasury, homeland security and commerce.

The US Energy Department also said they have evidence hackers gained access to their networks as part of the massive cyber campaign. Politico had earlier reported the National Nuclear Security Administration, which manages the country's nuclear weapons stockpile, was targeted. The disclosures raise further national security concerns."[...]

TRUMP STAYS SILENT ON NUCLEAR-STOCKPILE HACK, FOCUSING ENERGY ON SHOWERHEADS AND TOILETS INSTEAD
Surprise, surprise: The president has said nothing about a massive Russian hack. But he's right on top of low-flow toilets and showerheads. (https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/12/donald-trump-russia-hack-showerheads)


That guy Trump fired for saying the voting was conducted and counted fairly was the head of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, right?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on December 18, 2020, 01:43:43 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on December 18, 2020, 01:34:34 PM
just catching up with this now:

Hacking campaign targeted US energy, treasury and commerce agencies
'Significant and ongoing' cyber attack, suspected to be the work of Russia, poses a grave risk to 'critical infrastructure entities' as well (https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/dec/17/us-government-cyber-attack-hack-russia)

"The US government continues to reel from a large and sophisticated hacking campaign that affected top federal agencies, including the energy department, the treasury and commerce departments, and is even said to have targeted the agency responsible for the country's nuclear weapons stockpile.

Authorities expressed increasing alarm over the hack, suspected to be the work of Russia, warning that it poses "a grave risk" to federal, state and local governments, as well as "critical infrastructure entities".

In a statement on Thursday, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (Cisa) also warned that it will be difficult to remove the malware inserted through network software.

"Removing this threat actor from compromised environments will be highly complex and challenging for organizations," the agency said.

Thursday's comments were the most detailed yet from the agency since reports of the hack emerged over the weekend. The US government on Wednesday confirmed that an operation by elite hackers affected its networks and said the attack was "significant and ongoing".

The true scale of the breach is still unknown, but looks to have extended beyond the US government. On Thursday, Reuters reported that Microsoft was also hacked as part of the suspected Russian campaign, according to people familiar with the matter.

SolarWinds, the company behind the software targeted by hackers, said earlier this week that up to 18,000 of its more than 300,000 customers had downloaded the compromised software.

Hackers believed to be working for Russia introduced malware into SolarWind's popular network safety tool called Orion, which is used by numerous government agencies and large corporations.

The hack began as early as March, when malicious code was snuck into updates to Orion, which monitors the computer networks of businesses and governments for outages.

That malware gave the hackers remote access to an organization's networks, including internal emails. The content the hackers sought to steal – and how successful they were – remains unclear.

Cisa said it was continuing to analyze the other avenues used by the attackers. So far, the hackers are known to have at least monitored email or other data within the US departments of defense, state, treasury, homeland security and commerce.

The US Energy Department also said they have evidence hackers gained access to their networks as part of the massive cyber campaign. Politico had earlier reported the National Nuclear Security Administration, which manages the country's nuclear weapons stockpile, was targeted. The disclosures raise further national security concerns."[...]

TRUMP STAYS SILENT ON NUCLEAR-STOCKPILE HACK, FOCUSING ENERGY ON SHOWERHEADS AND TOILETS INSTEAD
Surprise, surprise: The president has said nothing about a massive Russian hack. But he's right on top of low-flow toilets and showerheads. (https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/12/donald-trump-russia-hack-showerheads)


That guy Trump fired for saying the voting was conducted and counted fairly was the head of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, right?

Yes. So perhaps he wasn't as competent as people would like to believe him to be.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on December 18, 2020, 02:02:30 PM
Quote from: JBS on December 18, 2020, 01:43:43 PM
Yes. So perhaps he wasn't as competent as people would like to believe him to be.

Is that your interpretation?

I was thinking that removing the head of the agency and the resulting disorder was possibly seen by the hackers as the last piece they needed for the attack to go ahead and make the response that much less effective.

I haven't read much about him but I haven't heard anyone question his competence, and the overall election security should be some indication.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 18, 2020, 02:32:26 PM

     Pardons are coming. Chrimbus is almost here.

     (https://memegenerator.net/img/instances/400x/57480854/happy-chrimbus.jpg)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on December 18, 2020, 04:15:56 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on December 18, 2020, 02:02:30 PM
Is that your interpretation?

I was thinking that removing the head of the agency and the resulting disorder was possibly seen by the hackers as the last piece they needed for the attack to go ahead and make the response that much less effective.

I haven't read much about him but I haven't heard anyone question his competence, and the overall election security should be some indication.

The Guardian article says the attack started in March with the introduction of the malware into the Orion software.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on December 18, 2020, 04:22:59 PM
Quote from: JBS on December 18, 2020, 04:15:56 PM
The Guardian article says the attack started in March with the introduction of the malware into the Orion software.

Yes, I read that.

It doesn't change what I wrote and is why I said "last piece they needed".
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on December 18, 2020, 04:33:48 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on December 18, 2020, 04:22:59 PM
Yes, I read that.

It doesn't change what I wrote and is why I said "last piece they needed".

I took it to mean they've been doing this for several months and it's only now been discovered (or at least publicly talked about).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on December 18, 2020, 05:43:36 PM
MAGA leaders call for the troops to keep Trump in office
A growing call to invoke the Insurrection Act shows how hard-edged MAGA ideology has become in the wake of Trump's election loss. (https://www.politico.com/news/2020/12/18/trump-insurrection-act-presidency-447986)

"An 1807 law invoked only in the most violent circumstances is now a rallying cry for the MAGA-ites most committed to the fantasy that Donald Trump will never leave office.

The law, the Insurrection Act, allows the president to deploy troops to suppress domestic uprisings — not to overturn elections.

But that hasn't stopped the act from becoming a buzzword and cure-all for prominent MAGA figures like Sidney Powell and Lin Wood, two prominent pro-Trump attorneys leading efforts to overturn the 2020 election, and even one North Carolina state lawmaker. Others like Michael Flynn, Trump's first national security adviser who was recently pardoned for lying to the FBI, have made adjacent calls for Trump to impose martial law. The ideas have circulated in pro-Trump outlets and were being discussed over the weekend among the thousands of MAGA protesters who descended on state capitols and the Supreme Court to falsely claim Trump had won the election.

At its core, the Insurrection Act gives the president authority to send military and National Guard troops to quell local rebellions and violence, offering an exemption to prohibitions against using military personnel to enforce domestic laws. Historically, it has been used in moments of extreme national strife — the Civil War, the rise of the Ku Klux Klan, violent labor disputes, desegregation battles, rioting following Martin Luther King Jr.'s death.

Only once, however, has it been used in the wake of an election — and that was to stop a literal militia from seizing the Louisiana government on behalf of John McEnery, a former Confederate officer who had lost the 1872 governor's race.

Nonetheless, in the minds of some authoritarian-leaning and conspiracy-minded Trump supporters, the Insurrection Act has become a needed step to prevent President-elect Joe Biden from assuming the presidency. Their evidence-deficient reasoning: Democrats illegally rigged the election and are attempting a coup, and Trump must send in the troops to undo this conspiracy."[...]
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on December 19, 2020, 03:37:04 AM
Quote from: drogulus on December 18, 2020, 02:32:26 PM
     Pardons are coming. Chrimbus is almost here.

     (https://memegenerator.net/img/instances/400x/57480854/happy-chrimbus.jpg)
Oh! Happy Chrimbus! I wish you were my son!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 19, 2020, 08:10:30 AM
https://www.yahoo.com/news/trumps-future-tons-cash-plenty-195110674.html

Donald J. Trump will exit the White House as a private citizen next month perched atop a pile of campaign cash unheard-of for an outgoing president, and with few legal limits on how he can spend it.

Deflated by a loss he has yet to acknowledge, Trump has cushioned the blow by coaxing huge sums of money from his loyal supporters — often under dubious pretenses — raising roughly $250 million since Election Day along with the national party.

More than $60 million of that sum has gone to a new political action committee, according to people familiar with the matter, which Trump will control after he leaves office. Those funds, which far exceed what previous outgoing presidents had at their disposal, provide him with tremendous flexibility for his post-presidential ambitions: He could use the money to quell rebel factions within the party, reward loyalists, fund his travels and rallies, hire staff, pay legal bills and even lay the groundwork for a far-from-certain 2024 run.

The postelection blitz of fundraising has cemented Trump's position as an unrivaled force and the preeminent fundraiser of the Republican Party, even in defeat. His largest single day for online donations actually came after Election Day — raising almost $750,000 per hour Nov. 6. So did his second-biggest day. And his third.

"Right now, he is the Republican Party," said John McLaughlin, a Republican pollster who worked on Trump's reelection campaign. "The party knows that virtually every dollar they've raised in the last four years, it's because of Donald Trump."

...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 19, 2020, 09:32:29 AM
The Dangerous Radicalism of the Christian Right (https://podcast.thebulwark.com/david-french-the-dangerous-radicalism-of-the-christian-right)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on December 20, 2020, 01:04:05 PM
David Frum in The Atlantic:

13 Things Trump Got Right
Nobody does nothing as president, not even someone who watches television for five or six hours a day. (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/12/the-things-trump-got-right/617424/)

deceptively titled given the "despite his best efforts to fuck everything up this good thing happened" tone of the text
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 20, 2020, 02:07:10 PM
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/20/trump-files-long-shot-supreme-court-challenge-over-biden-win-in-pa.html
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 20, 2020, 02:18:12 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on December 20, 2020, 01:04:05 PM
David Frum in The Atlantic:

13 Things Trump Got Right
Nobody does nothing as president, not even someone who watches television for five or six hours a day. (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/12/the-things-trump-got-right/617424/)

deceptively titled given the "despite his best efforts to fuck everything up this good thing happened" tone of the text

I think the author is completely full of s**t on his "nearly doubling the standard tax deduction" claim. There used to be an "Exemption" and "Standard Deduction" which each were around $6,000.
The Standard Deduction was roughly doubled, but the Exemption was eliminated! The net increase was only a few hundred dollars.
This gaffe makes a terrible impression and reduces the author's credibility to almost zero IMO.
[Disclosure: I have prepared my own tax returns "by hand" for my entire adult life and have a good idea whereof I speak.]
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 20, 2020, 03:42:58 PM
Quote from: T. D. on December 20, 2020, 02:07:10 PM
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/20/trump-files-long-shot-supreme-court-challenge-over-biden-win-in-pa.html

Loser's gonna lose.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 21, 2020, 09:51:29 AM

     The future could be bright. So Republicans are trying to make sure it isn't. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/12/18/future-could-be-bright-so-republicans-are-trying-make-sure-it-isnt/)

Anything that helps the economy also helps the president politically, whether it's his doing or not; likewise, if the economy suffers, he will bear the lion's share of the blame. Republicans remember well how they were able to force President Barack Obama to accept austerity measures; they also created a series of fiscal crises (including a government shutdown and even a threat to default on the United States' debts) that kept the post-Great Recession recovery from accelerating. There is simply no doubt that they're going to try the same thing again.

     It's not like Repubs can hide what they're doing.

     The curious part is that Repubs offer solutions to economic problems that are the same as the weapons used to damage the Dems. How do they get away with that?

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on December 22, 2020, 04:18:02 AM
Pat Robertson: "Trump Lives In An Alternate Reality."

Previously he had said God picked Trump to be the president. I suppose sometimes God just picks poorly.  :P

Anyway, when someone like Pat Robertson says you are not all there you really have issues!  ???
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Jo498 on December 22, 2020, 10:09:01 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on December 22, 2020, 04:18:02 AM
Pat Robertson: "Trump Lives In An Alternate Reality."

Previously he had said God picked Trump to be the president. I suppose sometimes God just picks poorly.  :P
He sometimes gives in to the will of the people when they want a particularly cool guy at the top. Be careful what you wish for - it could be granted! Look up the story of King Saul or listen to Handel's dramatization...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on December 22, 2020, 02:11:31 PM
Quote from: Jo498 on December 22, 2020, 10:09:01 AM
He sometimes gives in to the will of the people when they want a particularly cool guy at the top. Be careful what you wish for - it could be granted! Look up the story of King Saul or listen to Handel's dramatization...

I think it's more likely Pat was getting worried that Trump's antics might threaten Pat's various business ventures.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 22, 2020, 03:23:17 PM
     Now are the pardons.

     Trump Pardons Two Russia Inquiry Figures and Blackwater Guards (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/22/us/politics/trump-pardons.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage)

Mr. Trump's pardon list also included four former U.S. service members who were convicted of killing Iraqi civilians while working as contractors in 2007.

One of them, Nicholas Slatten, had been sentenced to life in prison after the Justice Department had gone to great lengths to prosecute him. Mr. Slatten, had been a contractor for the controversial company Blackwater and was sentenced for his role in the killing of 17 Iraqi civilians in Nisour Square in Baghdad — a massacre that left one of the most lasting stains on the United States of the war.


     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 23, 2020, 07:22:23 AM
     Trump is not even a little bit trying to sabotage/steal/overturn the election because it's fake news that he's doing it.

     A number of Repub reps have declared that votes in their own states were invalid, so Biden was wrongly awarded electoral votes and it follows that these reps were not elected either. Because a substantial amount of ticket splitting gave Repubs wins in congressional races in battleground states, many Biden votes these reps want to throw out provided the margin of victory for their own races.

     There's a wonderful anecdote about Stalin that goes like this. Stalin meets with a functionary and says to him "I hear you have a Jewish grandfather." The frightened official replies "No, comrade Stailin, it's not true!". Stalin pauses then says "Well, all right, but all the same you'd better think about it.".

     I know, the Stalin story is a malicious invention, or perhaps a typical Soviet era joke. Still, we ought to think about it.

     As a humorist our Trumptator is no match for any of the greats.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on December 23, 2020, 01:53:04 PM
Pardon, but some of the news that I heard today regarding the providing monetary assistance to businesses and individuals included a lot to things doing neither?  It was also providing funding to our government to keep it working which I understand...but it was so much more than that.  I'm trying to understand where a lot of the money is going and also why during these horrible times.  And, I do agree with Pres. Trump that more money should be going to individuals.  Currently, I'm left feeling like people are tacking things onto the bill (like this never happens).  >:(
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 23, 2020, 02:01:15 PM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on December 23, 2020, 01:53:04 PM
Pardon, but some of the news that I heard today regarding the providing monetary assistance to businesses and individuals included a lot to things doing neither?  It was also providing funding to our government to keep it working which I understand...but it was so much more than that.  I'm trying to understand where a lot of the money is going and also why during these horrible times.  And, I do agree with Pres. Trump that more money should be going to individuals.  Currently, I'm left feeling like people are tacking things onto the bill (like this never happens).  >:(

     You're right, this has never before happened in the history of omnibus bills. Either you're on the omnibus......

     (https://i.pinimg.com/originals/45/f6/97/45f697beec6a80f5d21153695f495a9a.jpg)

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on December 23, 2020, 03:27:10 PM
Manafort and Stone pardoned too. And Charles Kushner.
(Of course ...)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on December 23, 2020, 03:44:17 PM
'Our blood is cheaper than water': anger in Iraq over Trump pardons
Joe Biden to be lobbied to reverse decision to pardon security guards jailed over massacre (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/dec/23/our-blood-is-cheaper-than-water-iraqis-anger-over-trump-pardons)

"Iraqis have reacted with outrage to Donald Trump's move to pardon four security guards from the security firm Blackwater who were jailed for a 2007 massacre that sparked an outcry over the use of mercenaries in war.

The four men were part of a security convoy that fired on civilians at a central Baghdad roundabout, killing 14 people including a nine-year old child and wounding many more.

The four guards – Paul Slough, Evan Liberty, Dustin Heard and Nicholas Slatten – opened fire indiscriminately with machine guns, grenade launchers and a sniper on a crowd of unarmed people at a roundabout, known as Nisour Square.

The killings were one of the lowest points of the US-led invasion of Iraq, and many Iraqis saw the convictions as a rare occasion where US citizens had been held to account for atrocities committed during the aftermath. Baghdad residents who spoke to the Guardian described the outgoing US president's announcement as a "cruel slap" and an insult.

Adil al-Khazali, whose father Ali was killed in the attack, said he was shocked by the news. "Justice doesn't exist. I ask the American people to stand with us. I lost my father and many innocent women and children also died," he told the Guardian.

"I ask the US government to reconsider, because by this decision US courts are losing their reputation. Trump has no right to pardon killers of innocent people."

Dr Haidar al-Barzanji, an Iraqi researcher and academic, said "Trump has no right to decide on behalf of victims' families to pardon these criminals. It is at odds with human rights and against the law. In Iraqi law they can only be pardoned if the families of victims pardon them. I encourage the families of the victims to request a complaint against Trump when the Biden administration starts."

The Iraqi human rights activist Haidar Salman tweeted: "I still remember my professor of haematology at Baghdad University department of pathology (who was shot during the massacre along with his family) when he returned to life after his two children and his wife were killed in Nisour Square and almost lost his mind.

"One reason for him to survive was to condemn the murderers. The person who releases these criminals is more of a criminal. The Iraqi government should ask the Biden administration to revoke the pardon."

The carnage at Nisour Square came more than four years into the US invasion, which sparked a vicious sectarian war and mass displacement of Iraqis. The long US occupation had left citizens resentful of security convoys that carved swathes through traffic at will, sometimes shooting towards cars that had trailed too closely.

Private security contractors, supporting logistics companies, or in some cases the US military, were a frequent source of complaints about heavy-handed and disrespectful behaviour towards locals.

"We used to be terrified of them, especially Blackwater, who were the nastiest of them all," said Ribal Mansour, who heard the chaos at Nisour Square on 16 September 2007, and ran to the scene. "What I saw there will haunt me for ever. It should have been a red line. For them to be freed by the US commander-in-chief is shameful."[...]
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 23, 2020, 04:54:26 PM
Quote from: MusicTurner on December 23, 2020, 03:27:10 PM
Manafort and Stone pardoned too. And Charles Kushner.
(Of course ...)

He's all about obstruction of justice.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on December 23, 2020, 06:43:55 PM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on December 23, 2020, 01:53:04 PM
Pardon, but some of the news that I heard today regarding the providing monetary assistance to businesses and individuals included a lot to things doing neither?  It was also providing funding to our government to keep it working which I understand...but it was so much more than that.  I'm trying to understand where a lot of the money is going and also why during these horrible times.  And, I do agree with Pres. Trump that more money should be going to individuals.  Currently, I'm left feeling like people are tacking things onto the bill (like this never happens).  >:(

The normal budget legislation was joined to the relief bill to make sure it passed, since there's about to be a government shutdown. Then Trump decided he hadn't been given enough attention so he threatened to veto it.

He did veto the defense appropriation bill because it changed the names on bases currently named for Confederates and didn't repeal the law that keeps him from suing Twitter.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on December 23, 2020, 07:05:13 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 23, 2020, 04:54:26 PM
He's all about obstruction of justice.

The law and order president of the law and order party.  :(
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 23, 2020, 07:25:09 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on December 23, 2020, 07:05:13 PM
The law and order president of the law and order party.  :(

In a sorry nutshell.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 24, 2020, 08:05:22 AM
You've dragged this country into this place: more than 323,000 dead Americans, a president plotting to steal an election, whispers of military coups, pardons for crooks and war criminals, a potential constitutional crisis, and a possible government shutdown. And, after four interminable years, a nation that is dumber, crueler, and more divided. (https://morningshots.thebulwark.com/p/what-were-you-thinking)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on December 24, 2020, 09:30:27 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 24, 2020, 08:05:22 AM
You've dragged this country into this place: more than 323,000 dead Americans, a president plotting to steal an election, whispers of military coups, pardons for crooks and war criminals, a potential constitutional crisis, and a possible government shutdown. And, after four interminable years, a nation that is dumber, crueler, and more divided. (https://morningshots.thebulwark.com/p/what-were-you-thinking)

Very interesting stuff, Karl. The entire page/blog, that is to say. Thanks! BTW, did you get any messages from me?

8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on December 24, 2020, 12:45:25 PM
Quote from: JBS on December 23, 2020, 06:43:55 PM
The normal budget legislation was joined to the relief bill to make sure it passed, since there's about to be a government shutdown. Then Trump decided he hadn't been given enough attention so he threatened to veto it.

He did veto the defense appropriation bill because it changed the names on bases currently named for Confederates and didn't repeal the law that keeps him from suing Twitter.
Thank you for the info.  From what I recall hearing after my posting, Pelosi was keen to increase the amount to inviduals to $2,000, but at least some republicans were fighting the democrats on that.   :(

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 24, 2020, 05:44:05 PM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on December 24, 2020, 09:30:27 AM
Very interesting stuff, Karl. The entire page/blog, that is to say. Thanks! BTW, did you get any messages from me?

8)

Oui, gentil Monsieur!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on December 26, 2020, 03:26:56 PM
They tell us that this is art because it makes us uncomfortable. It just seems predictable and boring to me.

Ok, it's Canada. But, on the other hand, it's the New York Times:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/21/arts/music/handel-messiah-canada-indigenous.html

Perhaps the most intense intervention is that of Rihab Chaieb, a Tunisian-Canadian mezzo-soprano who has sung often with the Metropolitan Opera. She removed Jesus from her aria altogether, changing "He was despised" to "She is despised," to evoke herself and her Muslim mother.

Quebec recently passed a law banning teachers, and other public sector workers from wearing religious symbols like head scarves while at work. Ms. Chaieb said neighbors in Montreal had called her veiled mother a terrorist, inspiring this singer to use Handel's music to express her estrangement.

In her segment, Ms. Chaieb is portrayed in black and white as a dutiful daughter, drinking tea in her mother's apartment. But when she is shown, in color, under a graffiti-splattered underpass in Montreal, her barely submerged pain gradually crescendos as she sings in her native French.

"My reinterpretation of the 'Messiah' is about me feeling despised and rejected as a first-generation immigrant in Montreal," she said. "Like me, Jesus felt wretched and despised. But by taking Jesus out of the equation and making it more personal, I have reclaimed the 'Messiah' as my own."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 26, 2020, 03:32:26 PM
Quote from: milk on December 26, 2020, 03:26:56 PM
They tell us that this is art because it makes us uncomfortable. It just seems predictable and boring to me.

Yes, undermines her ostensible points.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on December 26, 2020, 04:00:25 PM
Not that I'm about to tell anyone how to dress, but whenever I see a hijab around town I'm always struck by how elegant they are.

Also: isn't covering any part of your (naughty and sinful) body an extension of ancient religious laws? ("our" great religion, "their" primitive superstitions)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on December 27, 2020, 04:52:13 PM
https://www.salon.com/2020/12/27/50-year-study-of-tax-cuts-on-wealthy-shows-they-always-fail-to-trickle-down/
50-year study of tax cuts on wealthy shows they always fail to "trickle down"
The left busies itself on fringe issues. Meanwhile, the overwhelming majority of people are losing out?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 27, 2020, 04:58:55 PM
From the Institute of Studies That Prove What We Already Know to Be True.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on December 28, 2020, 05:21:39 AM
Quote from: milk on December 27, 2020, 04:52:13 PM
https://www.salon.com/2020/12/27/50-year-study-of-tax-cuts-on-wealthy-shows-they-always-fail-to-trickle-down/
50-year study of tax cuts on wealthy shows they always fail to "trickle down"
The left busies itself on fringe issues. Meanwhile, the overwhelming majority of people are losing out?

This has been known for a long time. At least I knew. Whenever a right-winger says "Sosialism has never worked", left-wingers can say back "So hasn't trickle-down economics." A person genuinely interested in evidence based empirical economics concludes what works is something other than these and in fact it is: Social democracy which is kind of trickle-UP economics and it works, because those who don't have much money have to spend most of it fast to live instead of hoarding it into places where money doesn't circulate in the economic system.

Sorry about this quick intervention. I just couldn't pass this "I told you so" moment.  0:)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 28, 2020, 02:13:36 PM
Biden accuses Trump appointees of obstructing transition on national security issues
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 28, 2020, 02:23:11 PM
America isn't 'hopelessly divided.' It only looks that way because of our Constitution. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/12/28/america-isnt-hopelessly-divided-it-only-looks-that-way-because-our-constitution/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 29, 2020, 07:15:09 AM
It's the perfect distillation of the dead-end conundrum of Trumpism:

Republicans know that they can't win without the kooks.

Republicans also know that they definitely might lose with them.

And this dissonance has left the GOP too paralyzed to think of any other way forward.

Georgia Is a Quiet Place for Republicans (https://thebulwark.com/georgia-is-a-quiet-place-for-republicans/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on December 29, 2020, 09:50:36 AM
I found this article to be quite interesting.  It's about attempts to remove some 4,000+ voters from being eligible to vote in Georgia (due to possible incorrect addresses).

"A federal judge halts a voter purge in two Georgia counties before the runoff."

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/12/29/us/joe-biden-trump#a-federal-judge-halts-a-voter-purge-in-two-georgia-counties-before-the-runoff

PD

p.s.  Today is the last date for early voting in the Georgia senators two runoff races.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 29, 2020, 10:17:41 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on December 29, 2020, 09:50:36 AM
I found this article to be quite interesting.  It's about attempts to remove some 4,000+ voters from being eligible to vote in Georgia (due to possible incorrect addresses).

"A federal judge halts a voter purge in two Georgia counties before the runoff."

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/12/29/us/joe-biden-trump#a-federal-judge-halts-a-voter-purge-in-two-georgia-counties-before-the-runoff

PD

p.s.  Today is the last date for early voting in the Georgia senators two runoff races.

At this stage, the GOP openly concedes that they are all about voter suppression.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on December 30, 2020, 03:38:04 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 29, 2020, 10:17:41 AM
At this stage, the GOP openly concedes that they are all about voter suppression.

Not just voter suppression. They don't believe in the USA, it's constitution and democracy. They just want to be in power and have their Christian theocracy.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 30, 2020, 10:41:09 AM
There is all that as well.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on December 31, 2020, 03:59:10 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on December 28, 2020, 05:21:39 AM
Quote from: milk on December 27, 2020, 04:52:13 PM
https://www.salon.com/2020/12/27/50-year-study-of-tax-cuts-on-wealthy-shows-they-always-fail-to-trickle-down/
50-year study of tax cuts on wealthy shows they always fail to "trickle down"
The left busies itself on fringe issues. Meanwhile, the overwhelming majority of people are losing out?

This has been known for a long time. At least I knew. Whenever a right-winger says "Sosialism has never worked", left-wingers can say back "So hasn't trickle-down economics." A person genuinely interested in evidence based empirical economics concludes what works is something other than these and in fact it is: Social democracy which is kind of trickle-UP economics and it works, because those who don't have much money have to spend most of it fast to live instead of hoarding it into places where money doesn't circulate in the economic system.

Sorry about this quick intervention. I just couldn't pass this "I told you so" moment.  0:)

I've heard plenty of right-wing American conservatives rant over the years about "redistribution".  Of course they mean taking their money and giving it to the poor.  But huge tax reductions is redistribution of precisely the opposite effect.

"Trickle-down", (a.k.a. supply-side -- or as I call it, Bribe the Rich), doesn't work because it doesn't necessarily, or even very often, result in the new, productive investment that creates jobs.  There are too many other things rich folks can do with their money, principally speculation, that is, buying up existing assets in the hope of further appreciation.  A current example of this is the record-breaking stock market.  The market isn't reflecting the Covid-10 crisis because huge amounts of free cash are available, not to mention low interest rates, that result in non-productive so-called investment rather than real investment.

If governments want to stimulate the economy, i.e. create Demand, they need to give money to poor folk who will immediately spend it, or alternatively, directly spend on things like infrastructure.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on December 31, 2020, 04:07:44 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on December 30, 2020, 03:38:04 AM
Not just voter suppression. They don't believe in the USA, it's constitution and democracy. They just want to be in power and have their Christian theocracy.

You are speaking of the Christian Right in the USA.  It's true:  very many of these people want, in effect, a theocracy.

Worthwhile books on the subject are Chris Hedges' American Fascists: Christian Right and the War on America.  Also Michelle Goldberg's The Rise of Christian Nationalism; Kingdom Coming.

For a fictional take, there's Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on December 31, 2020, 04:12:45 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on December 31, 2020, 04:07:44 AM
You are speaking of the Christian Right in the USA.  It's true:  very many of these people want, in effect, a theocracy.

Worthwhile books on the subject are Chris Hedges' American Fascists: Christian Right and the War on America.  Also Michelle Goldberg's The Rise of Christian Nationalism; Kingdom Coming.

For a fictional take, there's Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale.
Great book!  I read that years ago....still applicable (sadly).  I need to read the 'follow-up' novel by her.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on December 31, 2020, 08:57:37 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on December 31, 2020, 03:59:10 AM
This has been known for a long time. At least I knew. Whenever a right-winger says "Sosialism has never worked", left-wingers can say back "So hasn't trickle-down economics." A person genuinely interested in evidence based empirical economics concludes what works is something other than these and in fact it is: Social democracy which is kind of trickle-UP economics and it works, because those who don't have much money have to spend most of it fast to live instead of hoarding it into places where money doesn't circulate in the economic system.

Sorry about this quick intervention. I just couldn't pass this "I told you so" moment.  0:)


I've heard plenty of right-wing American conservatives rant over the years about "redistribution".  Of course they mean taking their money and giving it to the poor.  But huge tax reductions is redistribution of precisely the opposite effect.

"Trickle-down", (a.k.a. supply-side -- or as I call it, Bribe the Rich), doesn't work because it doesn't necessarily, or even very often, result in the new, productive investment that creates jobs.  There are too many other things rich folks can do with their money, principally speculation, that is, buying up existing assets in the hope of further appreciation.  A current example of this is the record-breaking stock market.  The market isn't reflecting the Covid-10 crisis because huge amounts of free cash are available, not to mention low interest rates, that result in non-productive so-called investment rather than real investment.

If governments want to stimulate the economy, i.e. create Demand, they need to give money to poor folk who will immediately spend it, or alternatively, directly spend on things like infrastructure.

Buying up existing assets merely transfers the money: the seller then has to decide what to do with the money.

The flaw in trickle down is that no one is required to invest the money domestically.  If I use my tax cut to invest in a Ruritanian factory, I may be helping Ruritania, but I certainly not helping other Americans.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 31, 2020, 09:27:15 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on December 31, 2020, 03:59:10 AM
This has been known for a long time. At least I knew. Whenever a right-winger says "Sosialism has never worked", left-wingers can say back "So hasn't trickle-down economics." A person genuinely interested in evidence based empirical economics concludes what works is something other than these and in fact it is: Social democracy which is kind of trickle-UP economics and it works, because those who don't have much money have to spend most of it fast to live instead of hoarding it into places where money doesn't circulate in the economic system.

Sorry about this quick intervention. I just couldn't pass this "I told you so" moment.  0:)


I've heard plenty of right-wing American conservatives rant over the years about "redistribution".  Of course they mean taking their money and giving it to the poor.  But huge tax reductions is redistribution of precisely the opposite effect.



     Uh oh, here I go again.

     I once thought distribution was "re" in the way people do, as though so-called tax dollars, having been taken, were turned over to other parties. It appears to be a myth in the service of what some wiseguy termed "folk economics". In this belief there are dollars that go round and round in a kind of traffic circle with no entrance or exit. The government only exchanges these dollars with others on a zero sum basis. If it should ever appear that there are more dollars than there used to be, it's an outrage, probably due to government interference in its money.

     In a proper money circle new money never gets in or leaves. How the initial number of dollars was established is unknown, but probably a crime was committed.

     An alternative view says dollars are created by the sovereign authority and then are taxed back to control their value. Extinguished dollars cannot be resurrected, and all US dollars are newly spent. Spending is what creates them and taxing puts an end to them. No rich person ever commits the moral hazard of feeding a poor child via a tax.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 31, 2020, 10:14:46 AM
He's scarcely raised a fat finger to save 340K Americans' lives, but he has ample steam to try to undermine Democracy

Trump makes 2nd request to Supreme Court over Wisconsin loss (https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/12/30/nation/trump-makes-2nd-request-supreme-court-over-wisconsin-loss/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on December 31, 2020, 01:04:43 PM
Quote from: drogulus on December 31, 2020, 09:27:15 AM
     Uh oh, here I go again.

     I once thought distribution was "re" in the way people do, as though so-called tax dollars, having been taken, were turned over to other parties. It appears to be a myth in the service of what some wiseguy termed "folk economics". In this belief there are dollars that go round and round in a kind of traffic circle with no entrance or exit. The government only exchanges these dollars with others on a zero sum basis. If it should ever appear that there are more dollars than there used to be, it's an outrage, probably due to government interference in its money.

     In a proper money circle new money never gets in or leaves. How the initial number of dollars was established is unknown, but probably a crime was committed.

     An alternative view says dollars are created by the sovereign authority and then are taxed back to control their value. Extinguished dollars cannot be resurrected, and all US dollars are newly spent. Spending is what creates them and taxing puts an end to them. No rich person ever commits the moral hazard of feeding a poor child via a tax.

Economics isn't a zero sum game.  Economies expand, normally, on account of "Demand" (in the economic sense), rarely on account of "Supply".  That's the problem with "Supply-side" polices:  they presume that if people have a lot of money, they will invest it resulting in jobs and thus "trickle-down".  Unfortunately this is true to any great extent.  As I explained, the rich don't have to invest, they can simple salt away their money, (again as I explained, most often by buying existing assets which drives up their prices but doesn't added to productive capacity.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 31, 2020, 01:08:15 PM
Knowing that I am a White House reporter who has raised these issues—and been routinely ignored, lied to, or insulted for doing so—friends and acquaintances often ask me if the members of Trump's team are "viciously evil" or "morally bankrupt."

My reply now usually mentions Hannah Arendt's description of Adolf Eichmann. Arendt, who wrote in the New Yorker and in her 1963 book Eichmann in Jerusalem about the trial of the infamous Nazi bureaucrat, said he was "terribly and terrifyingly normal."

In trying to understand how Eichmann could seem so ordinary in contrast to the horrendous crimes he committed, Arendt argued that his actions weren't driven by hate or malice but a "blind dedication" to the Nazi regime and a need to belong. This need, she said, overcame Eichmann's ability to think for himself. His desire to be able to say "we" and find a meaningful role for himself as an individual in a group dynamic clouded his thoughts and made the most horrific actions possible.

"The lesson that this long course in human wickedness had taught us," Arendt famously wrote, was "the lesson of the fearsome, word-and-thought-defying banality of evil."

Crimes, Crises, and Coup (https://thebulwark.com/crimes-crises-and-coup/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on December 31, 2020, 02:10:10 PM
Quote from: JBS on December 31, 2020, 08:57:37 AM
Buying up existing assets merely transfers the money: the seller then has to decide what to do with the money.

The flaw in trickle down is that no one is required to invest the money domestically.  If I use my tax cut to invest in a Ruritanian factory, I may be helping Ruritania, but I certainly not helping other Americans.

Good point, of course, about investing in foreign countries.

As for your first point, if the seller also buys and existing asset then no money goes of investment.  Keynes made the point decades ago that economies can wind down due to lack of Demand:  monies can be sequestered.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on December 31, 2020, 02:13:03 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 31, 2020, 01:08:15 PM
Knowing that I am a White House reporter who has raised these issues—and been routinely ignored, lied to, or insulted for doing so—friends and acquaintances often ask me if the members of Trump's team are "viciously evil" or "morally bankrupt."

My reply now usually mentions Hannah Arendt's description of Adolf Eichmann. Arendt, who wrote in the New Yorker and in her 1963 book Eichmann in Jerusalem about the trial of the infamous Nazi bureaucrat, said he was "terribly and terrifyingly normal."

In trying to understand how Eichmann could seem so ordinary in contrast to the horrendous crimes he committed, Arendt argued that his actions weren't driven by hate or malice but a "blind dedication" to the Nazi regime and a need to belong. This need, she said, overcame Eichmann's ability to think for himself. His desire to be able to say "we" and find a meaningful role for himself as an individual in a group dynamic clouded his thoughts and made the most horrific actions possible.

"The lesson that this long course in human wickedness had taught us," Arendt famously wrote, was "the lesson of the fearsome, word-and-thought-defying banality of evil."

Crimes, Crises, and Coup (https://thebulwark.com/crimes-crises-and-coup/)

"Careerism", as least as much as ideology, propelled many Nazis to high positions and evil doing.  We needn't suppose the Trump hangers-on believe in Trump's vision, (of which he clearly has none).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 01, 2021, 10:33:31 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on December 31, 2020, 02:13:03 PM
"Careerism", as least as much as ideology, propelled many Nazis to high positions and evil doing.  We needn't suppose the Trump hangers-on believe in Trump's vision, (of which he clearly has none).

Indeed.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 01, 2021, 10:41:25 AM
Congress overrides a Trump veto for the first time with Senate vote on defense bill.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 01, 2021, 10:47:12 AM
Quote from: JBS on December 31, 2020, 08:57:37 AM


The flaw in trickle down is that no one is required to invest the money domestically. 

     It's more than that. If I'm a business owner I look at a change in the tax code like this. I invest if my customers get a tax cut (or an equivalent spending increase). If the cut goes directly to me or my business I will buy back shares or sit on cash. I may not "believe in" demand side economics but I'm not dumb. When money is at stake you go with what works.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 02, 2021, 09:39:32 AM
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-02/cruz-set-to-lead-group-of-gop-senators-in-opposing-certification

A group of 11 Republican senators is pledging to oppose certification of President Donald Trump's election loss, rejecting leadership who warned against attempts to undermine the election or risk splintering the party.

Congress on Jan. 6 is required by the U.S. Constitution to meet and accept the results of the Electoral College, which affirmed Democrat Joe Biden as president-elect, a gathering that is typically a formality.

Instead, Senator Ted Cruz of Texas led a group on Saturday in calling for a delay of full certification, and a 10-day investigation into accusations of wrongdoing. Those accusations have been stoked by Trump but repeatedly dismissed in court.

The investigation is seen as a condition that's all but certain to not be met, people familiar with the matter said. Without it, "we intend to vote on January 6 to reject the electors from disputed states as not 'regularly given' and 'lawfully certified,'" the senators said in a written statement issued Saturday.

The group includes Senators Cruz, Ron Johnson, James Lankford, Steve Daines, John Kennedy, Marsha Blackburn and Mike Braun, as well as Senators-elect Cynthia Lummis, Bill Hagerty, Tommy Tuberville and Roger Marshall.

"Whether or not our elected officials or journalists believe it, that deep distrust of our democratic processes will not magically disappear. It should concern us all. And it poses an ongoing threat to the legitimacy of any subsequent administrations," the group said in a joint statement.


https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/trump-georgia-senate-runoffs-illegal-invalid-042554943.html

President Donald Trump declared the Senate runoff elections in Georgia both "illegal and invalid" in a tweet on Friday, which could dissuade his followers from heading to the polls.

The results of the Jan. 5 vote will determine which party controls the Senate. More than 3 million Georgians have already voted during the state's early voting period.


https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-02/judge-tosses-out-gohmert-suit-against-pence-over-electoral-votes

Representative Louie Gohmert suggested street violence as the next recourse after a federal judge in Texas threw out his lawsuit filed in an effort to overturn President Donald Trump's election loss.

The Texas lawmaker appeared on the conservative Newsmax network Friday night after U.S. District Judge Jeremy Kernodle dismissed Gohmert's suit, in which he argued that Vice President Mike Pence has the authority to unilaterally reverse the election result during a joint session of Congress Wednesday.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 02, 2021, 09:54:48 AM
Quote from: T. D. on January 02, 2021, 09:39:32 AM
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-02/cruz-set-to-lead-group-of-gop-senators-in-opposing-certification

A group of 11 Republican senators is pledging to oppose certification of President Donald Trump's election loss, rejecting leadership who warned against attempts to undermine the election or risk splintering the party.

Congress on Jan. 6 is required by the U.S. Constitution to meet and accept the results of the Electoral College, which affirmed Democrat Joe Biden as president-elect, a gathering that is typically a formality.

Instead, Senator Ted Cruz of Texas led a group on Saturday in calling for a delay of full certification, and a 10-day investigation into accusations of wrongdoing. Those accusations have been stoked by Trump but repeatedly dismissed in court.

The investigation is seen as a condition that's all but certain to not be met, people familiar with the matter said. Without it, "we intend to vote on January 6 to reject the electors from disputed states as not 'regularly given' and 'lawfully certified,'" the senators said in a written statement issued Saturday.

The group includes Senators Cruz, Ron Johnson, James Lankford, Steve Daines, John Kennedy, Marsha Blackburn and Mike Braun, as well as Senators-elect Cynthia Lummis, Bill Hagerty, Tommy Tuberville and Roger Marshall.

"Whether or not our elected officials or journalists believe it, that deep distrust of our democratic processes will not magically disappear. It should concern us all. And it poses an ongoing threat to the legitimacy of any subsequent administrations," the group said in a joint statement.


https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/trump-georgia-senate-runoffs-illegal-invalid-042554943.html

President Donald Trump declared the Senate runoff elections in Georgia both "illegal and invalid" in a tweet on Friday, which could dissuade his followers from heading to the polls.

The results of the Jan. 5 vote will determine which party controls the Senate. More than 3 million Georgians have already voted during the state's early voting period.


https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-02/judge-tosses-out-gohmert-suit-against-pence-over-electoral-votes

Representative Louie Gohmert suggested street violence as the next recourse after a federal judge in Texas threw out his lawsuit filed in an effort to overturn President Donald Trump's election loss.

The Texas lawmaker appeared on the conservative Newsmax network Friday night after U.S. District Judge Jeremy Kernodle dismissed Gohmert's suit, in which he argued that Vice President Mike Pence has the authority to unilaterally reverse the election result during a joint session of Congress Wednesday.


It isn't as if McConnell couldn't speak louder, if he wished.  This will allow the Quislings to set their disgraceful names down in the Cingressional record.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on January 02, 2021, 11:04:02 AM
Quote from: T. D. on January 02, 2021, 09:39:32 AM
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-02/cruz-set-to-lead-group-of-gop-senators-in-opposing-certification

A group of 11 Republican senators is pledging to oppose certification of President Donald Trump's election loss, rejecting leadership who warned against attempts to undermine the election or risk splintering the party.


It won't matter this cycle, but Republicans will probably take back the House in 2022.  Then they'd have a real chance of overriding the Electoral College in 2024.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 02, 2021, 11:40:01 AM
Quote from: Daverz on January 02, 2021, 11:04:02 AM
It won't matter this cycle, but Republicans will probably take back the House in 2022.  Then they'd have a real chance of overriding the Electoral College in 2024.

Yup. Scary (to me, at least).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 02, 2021, 11:52:20 AM
Quote from: Daverz on January 02, 2021, 11:04:02 AM
It won't matter this cycle, but Republicans will probably take back the House in 2022.  Then they'd have a real chance of overriding the Electoral College in 2024.

Alas, true.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on January 03, 2021, 10:00:12 AM
#45 phone recording, published by the Washington Post, getting some attention.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 03, 2021, 10:03:18 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on January 03, 2021, 10:00:12 AM
#45 phone recording, published by the Washington Post, getting some attention.

I just don't see Moscow Mitch much caring.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 03, 2021, 12:40:36 PM
I've heard the tape.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/audio/2021-01-03/trump-demands-georgia-official-find-11-780-votes-for-him-audio
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on January 03, 2021, 12:50:58 PM
Besides the excerpts, Washington Post now also presents the complete, 1 hour recording.

Mark Meadows apparently also in some trouble during the call, suggesting a compromise/deal, outside the court rooms.

Paul Ryan statement: Biden's victory is legitimate.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 03, 2021, 01:14:34 PM
52 U.S. Code § 20511 - Criminal penalties (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/52/20511)

A person, including an election official, who in any election for Federal office—

(1)knowingly and willfully intimidates, threatens, or coerces, or attempts to intimidate, threaten, or coerce, any person for—
(A) registering to vote, or voting, or attempting to register or vote;
(B) urging or aiding any person to register to vote, to vote, or to attempt to register or vote; or
(C) exercising any right under this chapter; or

(2)knowingly and willfully deprives, defrauds, or attempts to deprive or defraud the residents of a State of a fair and impartially conducted election process, by—
(A) the procurement or submission of voter registration applications that are known by the person to be materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent under the laws of the State in which the election is held; or
(B) the procurement, casting, or tabulation of ballots that are known by the person to be materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent under the laws of the State in which the election is held,

shall be fined in accordance with title 18 (which fines shall be paid into the general fund of the Treasury, miscellaneous receipts (pursuant to section 3302 of title 31), notwithstanding any other law), or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 03, 2021, 01:38:47 PM
2019 Georgia Code
Title 21 - Elections
Chapter 2 - Elections and Primaries Generally
Article 15 - Miscellaneous Offenses
§ 21-2-604. Criminal solicitation to commit election fraud; penalties
(https://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2019/title-21/chapter-2/article-15/section-21-2-604/)

(a)

(1) A person commits the offense of criminal solicitation to commit election fraud in the first degree when, with intent that another person engage in conduct constituting a felony under this article, he or she solicits, requests, commands, importunes, or otherwise attempts to cause the other person to engage in such conduct.
(2) A person commits the offense of criminal solicitation to commit election fraud in the second degree when, with intent that another person engage in conduct constituting a misdemeanor under this article, he or she solicits, requests, commands, importunes, or otherwise attempts to cause the other person to engage in such conduct.
(b)

(1) A person convicted of the offense of criminal solicitation to commit election fraud in the first degree shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than three years.
(2) A person convicted of the offense of criminal solicitation to commit election fraud in the second degree shall be punished as for a misdemeanor.
(c) It is no defense to a prosecution for criminal solicitation to commit election fraud that the person solicited could not be guilty of the crime solicited.
(d) The provisions of subsections (a) through (c) of this Code section are cumulative and shall not supersede any other penal law of this state.

-

can articles of impeachment be drawn up on a lame duck president?

(a "perfect" call! Just like Ukraine!)

-

18 USC 593: Interference by armed forces (https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title18-section593&num=0&edition=prelim)

Whoever, being an officer or member of the Armed Forces of the United States, prescribes or fixes or attempts to prescribe or fix, whether by proclamation, order or otherwise, the qualifications of voters at any election in any State; or
Whoever, being such officer or member, prevents or attempts to prevent by force, threat, intimidation, advice or otherwise any qualified voter of any State from fully exercising the right of suffrage at any general or special election; or
Whoever, being such officer or member, orders or compels or attempts to compel any election officer in any State to receive a vote from a person not legally qualified to vote; or
Whoever, being such officer or member, imposes or attempts to impose any regulations for conducting any general or special election in a State, different from those prescribed by law; or
Whoever, being such officer or member, interferes in any manner with an election officer's discharge of his duties-
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both; and disqualified from holding any office of honor, profit or trust under the United States.
This section shall not prevent any officer or member of the Armed Forces from exercising the right of suffrage in any district to which he may belong, if otherwise qualified according to the laws of the State of such district.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 03, 2021, 03:05:29 PM
Its not today's news and many here will have seen it before, but I'm just catching up with these two bits of info now (and I think even one member here mentioned the 350% turnout thing):

Trump Ally Confuses Michigan And Minnesota In Affidavit Claiming Voter Fraud (https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicholasreimann/2020/11/20/trump-ally-confuses-michigan-and-minnesota-in-affidavit-claiming-voter-fraud/?sh=37f7c81e135e)

[...]"The affidavit claimed to use data from the Michigan Secretary of State to show "a statistical anomaly so far outside of every statistical norm as to be virtually impossible."
Directly below that claim came statistics showing that the Benville Township precinct had a 350% turnout compared with the number of registered voters.
But Benville Township is not in Michigan—it is in Minnesota, and only has an estimated population of 82 people, meaning that if even a handful of voters registered on Election Day itself, which is allowed in Minnesota, that could easily result in a much higher turnout than what was previously on the voter rolls.
The affidavit goes on to list several other tiny townships in Minnesota, some even smaller than Benville.
Trump's legal team, particularly Sidney Powell, had promoted the affidavit as showing major evidence of voter fraud."[...]

Election lawsuit cites fraud in Michigan county that does not exist (https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2020/12/01/election-lawsuit-cites-fraud-michigan-county-does-not-exist/6475368002/)

"An election lawsuit by Sidney Powell, President Donald Trump's former lawyer, cites a witness who claims to have seen something strange with the votes counted in Michigan's Edison County.

Here's the thing: You can't point to Edison County on your Michigan hand. And not because it's in the Upper Peninsula.

Because, well, there is no Edison County in Michigan.

"In another case for Edison County, MI," the witness's statement reads, "Vice President Biden received more than 100% of the votes at 5:59 EST on November 4, 2020 and again he received 99.61% of the votes at 2:23 PM EST on November 5, 2020. These distributions are cause for concern and indicate fraud."[...]
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 03, 2021, 03:41:36 PM
Frivolity & Carelessness.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on January 03, 2021, 03:54:45 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on January 03, 2021, 01:38:47 PM

can articles of impeachment be drawn up on a lame duck president?

(a "perfect" call! Just like Ukraine!)

The answer is yes. The house could vote to impeach. One possible sanction for being convicted after his term of office (and I assume everyone knows neither the conviction nor the sanction will happen) is that Trump could be barred in future from holding public office.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 03, 2021, 05:05:08 PM
https://twitter.com/carlbernstein/status/1345845260602155009

In any other conceivable moment in US history, this tape would result in the leadership of both parties demanding the immediate resignation of the President of the United States.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 03, 2021, 05:39:34 PM
Quote from: T. D. on January 03, 2021, 05:05:08 PM
https://twitter.com/carlbernstein/status/1345845260602155009

In any other conceivable moment in US history, this tape would result in the leadership of both parties demanding the immediate resignation of the President of the United States.



Well, yes.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on January 04, 2021, 02:52:50 AM
Quote from: T. D. on January 03, 2021, 05:05:08 PM
https://twitter.com/carlbernstein/status/1345845260602155009

In any other conceivable moment in US history, this tape would result in the leadership of both parties demanding the immediate resignation of the President of the United States.
Tump would love it. He'd get Pence in to pardon him and he'd get even more status amongst his crazy followers as a victim.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: krummholz on January 04, 2021, 03:48:00 AM
Quote from: milk on January 04, 2021, 02:52:50 AM
Tump would love it. He'd get Pence in to pardon him and he'd get even more status amongst his crazy followers as a victim.

That might not be a winning strategy. Pence has shown some integrity of late, objecting to the lawsuit seeking to give him the power to overturn the election.

Of course, that might just get Pence branded as a RINO by rabid Trumpists. But it would also leave the door open to possible criminal charges against Crazy Don Corleone.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 04, 2021, 09:47:35 AM

     Dept of Interceptor Scrambling

     Donald Trump could be planning Turnberry trip as Scots airport told to expect a high-flyer the day before Joe Biden's inauguration (https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/donald-trump-could-be-planning-turnberry-trip-as-scots-airport-told-to-expect-a-high-flyer-the-day-before-joe-bidens-inauguration/?utm_source=twitter)

Airport sources said surveillance planes appeared to lay the groundwork for Trump's arrival in November. An MC-12W Liberty – a US Air Force version of the King Air 350ER, which is modified for the Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) role – landed at Prestwick on November 12. It made a number of flights over Trump Turnberry.

Another US Army aircraft that visited the airport on November 12 also carried out surveillance flights over Trump Turnberry.

A source said: "The survey aircraft was based at Prestwick for about a week. It is usually a sign Trump is going to be somewhere for an extended period."


     
     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on January 04, 2021, 09:57:51 AM
The severe Scottish lockdown introduced today is set to last throughout January. He'd probably be breaking a heavy bunch of rules there (too). Travelling into the country is also forbidden, unless for a very essential purpose.
Both his Scottish golf clubs have been losing millions for years, they don't seem to be gold mines. They're officially closed due to lock-down procedures until Febr 4th, according to their websites.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on January 04, 2021, 11:06:05 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on January 04, 2021, 09:57:51 AM
The severe Scottish lockdown introduced today is set to last throughout January. He'd probably be breaking a heavy bunch of rules there (too). Travelling into the country is also forbidden, unless for a very essential purpose.
Both his Scottish golf clubs have been losing millions for years, they don't seem to be gold mines. They're officially closed due to lock-down procedures until Febr 4th, according to their websites.

Too bad he got hold of Turnberry, a lovely piece of the Ayrshire coast. I was familiar with it for years before he ever entered the picture, since it had been on the Open Rota for quite a long time. IIRC, when he got it, the R&A removed it from consideration until such time as he goes underground. As it should be, I suppose, but still, I would like to see it again. :-\

8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 04, 2021, 03:27:55 PM
Trump Gives Medal Of Freedom To Loyalist GOP Congressman Nunes (https://www.npr.org/2021/01/04/953276901/trump-to-give-medal-of-freedom-to-loyalist-gop-congressman-nunes)

"Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., who defended President Trump in the investigation into Russia's interference in the 2016 election, has been awarded the Medal of Freedom, the White House announced Monday.

In announcing the award, the White House said Nunes helped "unearth the crime of the century" and "thwart a plot to take down a sitting United States president" — despite both being patently false.

The award to Nunes was criticized by the watchdog group, the Government Accountability Project.

"Rep. Nunes abandoned the bipartisan tradition of whistleblower protection and chilled future whistleblowers from coming forward when they witness wrongdoing," Irvin McCullough, a national security analyst with the group, said in a statement, referring to the whistleblower who triggered the impeachment investigation of Trump. "This isn't honorable; it's despicable. It's dangerous to award his misconduct."[...]
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on January 04, 2021, 06:39:58 PM
One of the things that is so sad is that in spite of everything there are still at least 40million Americans who believe Trump won the election.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on January 04, 2021, 09:27:26 PM
- Concerning the #45 'Million Militia March' on Wednesday in Washington DC, heavily promoted by #45 who's suggesting they go 'wild', I see that people possessing guns within 1000 feet of any demonstrations can be arrested by the police/National Guard.

- NBC reports, that in case #45 won't leave the WH voluntarily in late January, the Secret Service has made plans that Biden will govern from Blair House, and that water, electricity etc. will be blocked from the WH, hopefully forcing #45 and any accompanying entourage out of the building ...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 05, 2021, 01:58:54 AM
Wot, no tear gas?

And didn't he already have a million maga march that attracted hundreds?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on January 05, 2021, 02:31:43 AM
Due to the advertizing ahead of the Wednesday event, there'll probably be some 1000s of civilians, including some searching for trouble.

The sensible thing to do for those critical of #45 is to stay away and avoid any confrontations.

Yesterday's Georgia visit by #45 was rather small in scale - mainly a stage for some camera work, it seems.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: krummholz on January 05, 2021, 04:19:40 AM
It's unclear to me why the Secret Service can't simply escort #45 and his entourage from the premises.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on January 05, 2021, 04:34:27 AM
Quote from: krummholz on January 05, 2021, 04:19:40 AM
It's unclear to me why the Secret Service can't simply escort #45 and his entourage from the premises.

Hm, this was maybe a fault on my part, and maybe naive - the original source for the story about Biden in Blair House has disappeared.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 05, 2021, 05:11:45 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on January 05, 2021, 04:34:27 AM
Hm, this was maybe a fault on my part, and maybe naive - the original source for the story about Biden in Blair House has disappeared.
Looking around now, I saw some suggestions that President-Elect Biden should stay at Blair House for a while whilst the White House is properly cleaned due to the Corona virus.

Very interesting story about the possibility of Pres. Trump going to Scotland on the 19th and skipping the inauguration; nothing that he does (or might do) would surprise me these days.  :(

PD

p.s.  I wonder who leaked the story about the planes, etc. at the airport?  Doesn't bode well for security/safety there.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on January 05, 2021, 05:39:34 AM
Quote from: krummholz on January 04, 2021, 03:48:00 AM
That might not be a winning strategy. Pence has shown some integrity of late, objecting to the lawsuit seeking to give him the power to overturn the election.

Of course, that might just get Pence branded as a RINO by rabid Trumpists. But it would also leave the door open to possible criminal charges against Crazy Don Corleone.
The case grows harsher and harsher. Pence has a brand of being a "god-fearing" man of principle. Leaving aside what being on the trump train says about that, now Pence has to choose between being honest and having a future political career. The republicans rejecting Biden's win are concerned for reelection or, as in Cruz and Pence, looking to run for president themselves. Pence would destroy that hope by going against trump now. Maybe he can wiggle out. The case is hopeless anyway so maybe I'm wrong. He might think it won't matter to the outcome so what's an inconsequential lie. He can be dishonest knowing it's going nowhere anyway. I guess he could cross his fingers behind his back.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on January 05, 2021, 07:33:37 AM
Quote from: milk on January 05, 2021, 05:39:34 AM
The case grows harsher and harsher. Pence has a brand of being a "god-fearing" man of principle.

Pence used campaign funds to pay off his mortgage, credit cards, and other expenses running for Congress in Indiana in the 1990s while railing against his opponent for taking money from special interests. It cost him the election. He's proven himself a dishonest lowlife throughout the Trump administration. I've seen no principle he's not willing to compromise. His conscience is a well-beaten whore. Only a fool would expect honesty from him.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 05, 2021, 08:54:51 AM
Quote from: milk on January 05, 2021, 05:39:34 AM
The case grows harsher and harsher. Pence has a brand of being a "god-fearing" man of principle.

But the Evangelicals, e.g., have cadt all morality and principle to the devil.  The "god-fearing" brand doesn't count for much.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on January 05, 2021, 09:14:14 AM
Everyone is following Trump's crazy final days as the lame duck president, but does anyone here have an opinion about the forcethevote thing? Are you in Jimmy Dore club or Cenk Uygur's side on this? Both sides give believable arguments and I am undecided. What does this do to the left? Jimmy Dore says this was the moment to get medicare for all and now it won't happen in 10-15 years. Cenk Uygur says it can be done in short term if planning starts now. All I say is this is absolutely insane. It's difficult enough to get medicare for all implemented for all the utter corruption and now the left is this fragmented and toxic. Did the "fraudsquad" get consessions like getting rid of pay go? It's suck's to be an American... ...what a country.  :-\
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on January 05, 2021, 10:16:13 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on January 05, 2021, 09:14:14 AM
Everyone is following Trump's crazy final days as the lame duck president, but does anyone here have an opinion about the forcethevote thing? Are you in Jimmy Dore club or Cenk Uygur's side on this? Both sides give believable arguments and I am undecided. What does this do to the left? Jimmy Dore says this was the moment to get medicare for all and now it won't happen in 10-15 years. Cenk Uygur says it can be done in short term if planning starts now. All I say is this is absolutely insane. It's difficult enough to get medicare for all implemented for all the utter corruption and now the left is this fragmented and toxic. Did the "fraudsquad" get consessions like getting rid of pay go? It's suck's to be an American... ...what a country.  :-\

Perhaps it's not so obvious from Finland that Jimmy Dore is an idiot.  He's been attacking AOC as a sellout of late. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 05, 2021, 11:23:28 AM
First Minister Nicola Sturgeon on the possibility of Pres. Trump going to Scotland to play golf:

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-scotland-55553493

Wonder if they might not let his plane land?  Or only to let it refuel?

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: krummholz on January 05, 2021, 02:01:32 PM
Quote from: milk on January 05, 2021, 05:39:34 AM
The case grows harsher and harsher. Pence has a brand of being a "god-fearing" man of principle. Leaving aside what being on the trump train says about that, now Pence has to choose between being honest and having a future political career. The republicans rejecting Biden's win are concerned for reelection or, as in Cruz and Pence, looking to run for president themselves. Pence would destroy that hope by going against trump now. Maybe he can wiggle out. The case is hopeless anyway so maybe I'm wrong. He might think it won't matter to the outcome so what's an inconsequential lie. He can be dishonest knowing it's going nowhere anyway. I guess he could cross his fingers behind his back.

Pence is, indeed, impaled on the horns of a dilemma. I predict that when all is said and done, he will simply read the decision of Congress. He might make a comment that he personally considers the result invalid, but maybe not even that. I could be wrong.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on January 05, 2021, 02:37:26 PM
Quote from: Daverz on January 05, 2021, 10:16:13 AM
Perhaps it's not so obvious from Finland that Jimmy Dore is an idiot.  He's been attacking AOC as a sellout of late.

I don't know what to think about him. I'd not call him an idiot, but he surely is impatient! He explodes if other people don't adopt his ideas in 5 seconds. He also seems to suffer from some sort of paranoia: Everyone who disagrees with him is a sell out or working for the other side. He also seems to think only he can tell the Americans the "truth" while others are compromised.

One minute I feel he is feuding with everyone just to brand himself as the true "no-nonsense" leftist. Next minute I feel he has a point in saying what's the point of getting people like AOC elected if they don't really fight for people. Jimmy Dore is not alone in his frustrations. Even Kyle Kulinski has expressed his disappointment on how little the Justice Democrats actually fight. They have 98-100 % correct political positions, but none of them seems to be a leader forcing corporate Dems to move left. Unlike Jimmy Dore, Kyle Kulinski however seems to be constructive and is telling people on the left to calm down and instead of fighting each other, start seriously planning how to get lefty policies implemented.

At his best Jimmy Dore can be quite funny and I can relate to some of his impatience. The US needed to do single payer healthcare half a century ago and the Democrats majority in the house can't have even a damn VOTE on it during a pandemic? Who isn't frustrated?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on January 05, 2021, 03:55:52 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on January 05, 2021, 02:37:26 PM
but none of them seems to be a leader forcing corporate Dems to move left.

AOC is just about to start her second term and is one out of 435 representatives.  If he wants superheroes he should stick to comic books.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 05, 2021, 04:14:16 PM
Quote from: Daverz on January 05, 2021, 03:55:52 PM
AOC is just about to start her second term and is one out of 435 representatives.  If he wants superheroes he should stick to comic books.

(* chortle *)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on January 05, 2021, 06:27:13 PM
Quote from: Daverz on January 05, 2021, 03:55:52 PM
AOC is just about to start her second term and is one out of 435 representatives.  If he wants superheroes he should stick to comic books.

Comic book superheroes are needed, because the Republicans are comic book villains and corporate Dems aren't that much better. Nobody is expecting AOC or the squad to singlehandedly make single payer healthcare reality, but what they do doesn't appear fighting in the eyes of the people who elected them, donated to them and campaigned for them. That's a problem as we are seeing.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 06, 2021, 04:25:40 AM
Looking likely that the two Georgian Senate seats will go to the Democrats.

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 06, 2021, 04:30:45 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on January 06, 2021, 04:25:40 AM
Looking likely that the two Georgian Senate seats will go to the Democrats.

PD

Aye; It's been called for Warnock, and Ossof presently leads Perdue by 16K votes.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 06, 2021, 04:50:37 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on January 05, 2021, 06:27:13 PM
Comic book superheroes are needed, because the Republicans are comic book villains and corporate Dems aren't that much better. Nobody is expecting AOC or the squad to singlehandedly make single payer healthcare reality, but what they do doesn't appear fighting in the eyes of the people who elected them, donated to them and campaigned for them. That's a problem as we are seeing.

Possibly germane:

Bill Kristol:

As a newly inaugurated president, as the man who not only defeated Donald Trump but brought the Democratic party back to power (albeit very narrowly), Biden will enter office with real momentum. Even Democrats, a notoriously unruly lot, will feel some obligation to go along with the new president.

And some Republicans will, too. Some congressional Republicans would like to be in the game and be able to play some role, even if a minor one, in legislation in return for their support. This will be the case especially if Biden begins mostly with legislative proposals—especially on the pandemic, and also some economic relief—that are reasonably easy for some Republicans to support.

Who knows how long any honeymoon will last? And God knows  that honeymoons in a post-Trump and hyperpolarized political environment won't be what presidential honeymoons once were. But the odds tonight got quite a bit better that President Biden will have, and will be seen to have, a reasonably successful first few months in office.

[...]

Meanwhile, a word about Joe Biden: He made a bet on America. He never wavered from the promise to unite the country and actually get things done. People to his left scoffed. Trump supporters disdained him. But Biden never gave in. Tonight's result in Georgia will at least give him a fighting chance to do what he promised—and to focus not just on the very real threats we face, but also on the opportunities before us.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 06, 2021, 05:06:22 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on January 06, 2021, 04:30:45 AM
Aye; It's been called for Warnock, and Ossof presently leads Perdue by 16K votes.
Yup!  That's what I heard earlier this morning (on CNN).  Hope that it doesn't need to be recounted.

Congress to start counting the electoral votes soon...and National Guard has been deployed to help keep the peace during pro-Trump rally today in DC; some arrests have already been made there.

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 06, 2021, 06:01:14 AM
Jno. V Last: Mitch McConnell got his judges and lost control of his party because, ironically, it was Donald Trump who was playing the long game.

The Politics of Power (https://thetriad.thebulwark.com/p/the-politics-of-power)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 06, 2021, 06:26:40 AM
     The largest bloc of votes that remain to be counted are in the Atlanta area. Ossoff and Warnock will get most of them. After that you have the overseas vote that will favor Repubs, though not as much as the Atlanta area votes favor Dems.

     The Ossoff/Perdue race is headed for recountland. Recounts usually amount to a change on the order of a few hundred votes at most.

     A Georgia election official says Ossoff will probably exceed the recount threshold. He has a lead of 0.4% atm, and he'll probably go over 0.5%.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on January 06, 2021, 08:23:24 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on January 06, 2021, 04:50:37 AM
Possibly germane:

Bill Kristol:

As a newly inaugurated president, as the man who not only defeated Donald Trump but brought the Democratic party back to power (albeit very narrowly), Biden will enter office with real momentum. Even Democrats, a notoriously unruly lot, will feel some obligation to go along with the new president.

And some Republicans will, too. Some congressional Republicans would like to be in the game and be able to play some role, even if a minor one, in legislation in return for their support. This will be the case especially if Biden begins mostly with legislative proposals—especially on the pandemic, and also some economic relief—that are reasonably easy for some Republicans to support.

Who knows how long any honeymoon will last? And God knows  that honeymoons in a post-Trump and hyperpolarized political environment won't be what presidential honeymoons once were. But the odds tonight got quite a bit better that President Biden will have, and will be seen to have, a reasonably successful first few months in office.

[...]

Meanwhile, a word about Joe Biden: He made a bet on America. He never wavered from the promise to unite the country and actually get things done. People to his left scoffed. Trump supporters disdained him. But Biden never gave in. Tonight's result in Georgia will at least give him a fighting chance to do what he promised—and to focus not just on the very real threats we face, but also on the opportunities before us.

This wasn't a pro-Biden election. This was an anti-Trump election. Given how incompetent 2020 made Trump look americans would have voted for a ham sandwich to get rid of Trump. Anyone is better than Trump. So is Biden, easily. We can expect some good things from Biden. More competent handling of Covid-19 is one of them. Maybe $15 living wage. Maybe incremental improvement of Obamacare. Maybe restore of some important regulation Trump repelled. Things of that nature, but ultimately Biden is a status quo manager. Nothing will fundamentally change. He promised that to his donor, the oligarchs. So, don't expect much from him. That's the reason why some Republicans are willing to work with him --- on Republican terms!!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 06, 2021, 08:34:50 AM
If both Senate seats go to the Dems, it would bode well for Biden and his chances to actually do something.

However, it also gives a clear signal to the congressional Repubs who are thinking about 2022 and 2024. This runoff shows that cowtowing to Trump and his attempts to end democracy in America doesn't bring any rewards.

Happy Newyear guys.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 06, 2021, 08:42:37 AM
Quote from: drogulus on January 06, 2021, 06:26:40 AM
     The largest bloc of votes that remain to be counted are in the Atlanta area. Ossoff and Warnock will get most of them. After that you have the overseas vote that will favor Repubs, though not as much as the Atlanta area votes favor Dems.

     The Ossoff/Perdue race is headed for recountland. Recounts usually amount to a change on the order of a few hundred votes at most.

     A Georgia election official says Ossoff will probably exceed the recount threshold. He has a lead of 0.4% atm, and he'll probably go over 0.5%.
I hope for the election workers that they don't have to do a recount--and for the public's sake too.

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 06, 2021, 10:14:27 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 06, 2021, 08:34:50 AM
If both Senate seats go to the Dems, it would bode well for Biden and his chances to actually do something.

However, it also gives a clear signal to the congressional Repubs who are thinking about 2022 and 2024. This runoff shows that cowtowing to Trump and his attempts to end democracy in America doesn't bring any rewards.

Happy Newyear guys.

Happy New Year!  Was thinking of you earlier, good to hear from you.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 06, 2021, 10:16:48 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on January 06, 2021, 08:23:24 AM
--- on Republican terms!!

I think you still do not understand the importance of bipartisanship.  Also:  you may want to give the word "oligarchs" a good long rest.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 06, 2021, 10:24:01 AM
No surprise:

Trump is already inventing false allegations of fraud in Georgia (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/01/06/trump-is-already-inventing-false-allegations-fraud-georgia/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on January 06, 2021, 10:24:26 AM
Only in Trump's America:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2021/01/06/dc-protests-trump-rally-live-updates/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2021/01/06/dc-protests-trump-rally-live-updates/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on January 06, 2021, 10:25:39 AM
Lots of things happening today, for sure.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 06, 2021, 10:25:56 AM
     The secret service just whisked VP Pence out of the Senate chamber. Some protesters are said to have managed to get inside the building, though not in the chambers. Both houses are in recess. Some Congresspeople have been texted to shelter in place.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 06, 2021, 10:30:42 AM
Quote from: drogulus on January 06, 2021, 10:25:56 AM
     The secret service just whisked VP Pence out of the Senate chamber. Some protesters are said to have managed to get inside the building, though not in the chambers. Both houses are in recess. Some Congresspeople have been texted to shelter in place.
I've been watching it live on various news channels..CNN for the most part.  ???  And they have no idea whether or not anyone is carrying arms/weapons/bombs, etc.!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 06, 2021, 10:35:55 AM

     https://www.youtube.com/v/3Fsf4aWudJk&ab_channel=CBSNews
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on January 06, 2021, 10:44:11 AM
This is Trump's last stand, but the reality is he'll go down as one of the worst presidents in U.S. history.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mandryka on January 06, 2021, 11:05:48 AM
Proud boys, stand down and stand by.

Where's Toddy? Is he there?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 06, 2021, 11:13:59 AM

     (https://i.imgur.com/F7sFgmO.jpg)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on January 06, 2021, 11:22:05 AM
Trump was told by Secret Service to hunker down in the Oval Office. He's the monster that fueled this fire and now he's scared. If he has a spine at all, he'll extinguish this madness, but he doesn't, so people are going to get hurt.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on January 06, 2021, 11:38:42 AM
Looks like there won't be a Republican-elected president for quite some time after all this chaos is over. :)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Brahmsian on January 06, 2021, 11:39:15 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on January 06, 2021, 11:22:05 AM
Trump was told by Secret Service to hunker down in the Oval Office. He's the monster that fueled this fire and now he's scared. If he has a spine at all, he'll extinguish this madness, but he doesn't, so people are going to get hurt.

I really thought I'd seen it all regarding Trump and some of his supporters (I realize not all Trump supporters are extreme and unreasonable).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 06, 2021, 11:40:19 AM
Well, the past two weeks have brought the attempted coup that was vigorously denied here, to a head.

The Capitol building has been stormed and there have been shots inside the building.

Trump had encouraged his followers to come to DC and "be wild".
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 06, 2021, 11:41:44 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on January 06, 2021, 11:38:42 AM
Looks like there won't be a Republican-elected president for quite some time after all this chaos is over. :)

Unfortunately that's a non sequitur.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: ritter on January 06, 2021, 11:44:48 AM
Quote from: OrchestralNut on January 06, 2021, 11:39:15 AM
I really thought I'd seen it all regarding Trump and some of his supporters (I realize not all Trump supporters are extreme and unreasonable).
But I still have to encounter a Trump supporter who wouldn't say that the President's statements and actions that led to this mess weren't "legitimate", "perfectly within the law", etc., etc.

A tragic day, but perhaps hopefully also a cathartic one that may end this type of political discourse...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on January 06, 2021, 12:08:19 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on January 06, 2021, 11:22:05 AM
Trump was told by Secret Service to hunker down in the Oval Office. He's the monster that fueled this fire and now he's scared. If he has a spine at all, he'll extinguish this madness, but he doesn't, so people are going to get hurt.

Why on earth would you think he has any inclination to stop the coup? This is exactly what he wants.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on January 06, 2021, 12:30:06 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on January 06, 2021, 12:08:19 PM
Why on earth would you think he has any inclination to stop the coup? This is exactly what he wants.

Indeed. I hope he's locked up for treason.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on January 06, 2021, 12:34:02 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on January 06, 2021, 12:30:06 PM
Indeed. I hope he's locked up for treason.

Josh Hawley also actively encouraged the insurrection, signaling the clowns with a raised fist. Censure and impeachment are called for in his case. Trump should be indicted — well, for all sorts of things, actually.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: vandermolen on January 06, 2021, 12:58:38 PM
Very sorry to see what's going on in Washington at the moment.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 06, 2021, 01:08:44 PM
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-06/ap-newsalert-dc-police-chief-says-protesters-deployed-chemical-irritants-on-police-to-gain-access-to-us-capitol

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/06/ex-defense-secretary-trumps-cabinet-should-invoke-25th-amendment-to-remove-him-from-office-.html

Former Defense Secretary William Cohen told CNBC on Wednesday that President Donald Trump's Cabinet should invoke the 25th Amendment to remove him from office after pro-Trump rioters stormed the U.S. Capitol.

"I don't know where his Cabinet has been all this time, but it's long overdue for the 25th Amendment because this man is no longer capable of serving the United States of America," Cohen said on "Closing Bell." Cohen, who led the Defense Department during Bill Clinton's presidency, is also a former GOP senator and congressman from Maine.

The 25th amendment outlines how a president can be removed by the vice president and Cabinet members if deemed unable to carry out the duties of the office.

And another item:

The National Association of Manufacturers is out with a strong denunciation of today's events, and of the president. The industry group says, in part:
"The outgoing president incited violence in an attempt to retain power, and any elected leader defending him is violating their oath to the Constitution and rejecting democracy in favor of anarchy. Anyone indulging conspiracy theories to raise campaign dollars is complicit. Vice President Pence, who was evacuated from the Capitol, should seriously consider working with the Cabinet to invoke the 25th Amendment to preserve democracy."
The 25th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution establishes procedures to remove a sitting president if he is deemed "unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 06, 2021, 01:21:25 PM
Quote from: T. D. on January 06, 2021, 01:08:44 PM
Former Defense Secretary William Cohen told CNBC on Wednesday that President Donald Trump's Cabinet should invoke the 25th Amendment to remove him from office after pro-Trump rioters stormed the U.S. Capitol.


And Ilhan Omar is talking about yet another impeachment. None of this, however, is going to happen in these last two weeks. Core Republicans like the despicable Cruz will not cooperate.

At some point Trump will escape to Scotland, and from there at some later point he'll disappear to a safe place that doesn't do extraditions to the US.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on January 06, 2021, 01:38:37 PM
Americans must be so proud of their democracy and respect of democratic process right now!  :-\

I didn't expect this to get this bad, but I am not surprised either. This was all coming...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on January 06, 2021, 01:43:55 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on January 06, 2021, 12:34:02 PM
Josh Hawley also actively encouraged the insurrection, signaling the clowns with a raised fist. Censure and impeachment are called for in his case. Trump should be indicted — well, for all sorts of things, actually.

All of those with any involvement in this national embarrassment need to be locked up.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 06, 2021, 01:54:45 PM
Lincoln Project calls for immediate House impeachment and Senate conviction of Trump to force his expedited removal from office.

viz.,

Today's violence and insurrection in Washington and in state capitols is the direct responsibility of Donald Trump. This shameful culmination of four years of lies, propaganda, dog whistles, gaslighting, and conspiracy theories at the hands of a dangerous, unstable president has now put our Constitutional system of government at risk.

While our democracy has been under attack since Donald Trump was elected in 2016, today's domestic terrorist attack on the Capitol highlights just how much Trump and his enablers have entirely abandoned the principles of the Constitution and the Republic.

This is no longer simply about Donald Trump's charade. It is an armed, violent, and planned insurrection against the United States of America.  It is a moment where the tenets of Trumpism replaced the tenets of American democracy with the inevitable, violent results."

"Make no mistake, this is sedition and insurrection," said Lincoln Project co-founder Rick Wilson, "People have long asked why the Lincoln Project has targeted Trump's Republican allies, and today they have their answer. Those Republicans who have endorsed and encouraged Trump's lawless coup attempt in the House and Senate deserve to be prosecuted, not seated in the halls of government. The House should immediately impeach Donald Trump for directing and provoking this attack. The United States Senate should immediately vote to convict and remove him from office. Any Member of Congress who refuses to do so should be considered a co-conspirator.

The Lincoln Project is a group of former Republicans who worked to defeat Donald J. Trump's reelection and will continue to battle Trumpism in America. To learn more about The Lincoln Project, go to www.lincolnproject.us."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on January 06, 2021, 01:57:45 PM
Quote from: Herman on January 06, 2021, 01:21:25 PM
And Ilhan Omar is talking about yet another impeachment. None of this, however, is going to happen in these last two weeks. Core Republicans like the despicable Cruz will not cooperate.

At some point Trump will escape to Scotland, and from there at some later point he'll disappear to a safe place that doesn't do extraditions to the US.

Oh Herman, you've missed the funniest news of the past 24 hours! More than a handful of Scottish officials have made it clear that Trump will not be allowed into the country. A couple made the point by saying Scotland would not harbor him in his attempt to escape prosecution in the US.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on January 06, 2021, 01:59:41 PM
Quote from: T. D. on January 06, 2021, 01:54:45 PM
Lincoln Project calls for immediate House impeachment and Senate conviction of Trump to force his expedited removal from office.

All of this wouldn't have happened had he accepted his defeat like a man, but he's no man, but a mere child with a short fuse.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 06, 2021, 02:08:21 PM
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/06/ex-defense-secretary-blasts-authorities-f-preparation-to-prevent-capitol-siege.html

Former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta on Wednesday sharply criticized federal law enforcement in Washington, contending that inadequate preparation was taken to prevent the siege of the U.S. Capitol by supporters of President Donald Trump.

"What the hell was law enforcement on Capitol Hill thinking by not having secured the Capitol today?" Panetta said on CNBC's "Closing Bell," shortly after the National Guard was mobilized in response to the pro-Trump mob occupying the Capitol building.
...
"Everybody knew that there would be a disturbance," Panetta told CNBC. "Everybody knew that there would be people who were interested in doing nothing else but creating havoc in the Capitol. And very frankly, it was the responsibility of law enforcement and the Capitol Hill police to secure the Capitol and I'm not sure what happened that allowed this event."

Other former U.S. national security officials also are questioning whether federal law enforcement should have been more adequately prepared to secure the Capitol, knowing that the House and Senate would be in session to confirm the Electoral College vote.

"I think it's the most shocking failure of security imaginable to place the Congress of the United states at physical risk in an occupied congressional chamber because they weren't prepared to deal with it," Ret. Gen. Barry McCaffrey said earlier on "Closing Bell."
...

And:

Bloomberg's Greg Farrell checked in on former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen, who once told Congress that if the president lost the 2020 election, there wouldn't be a peaceful transfer of power. Few believed him at the time.
Cohen's message now is simple.
"I told you so," he said.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: vandermolen on January 06, 2021, 02:23:15 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on January 06, 2021, 01:59:41 PM
All of this wouldn't have happened had he accepted his defeat like a man, but he's no man, but a mere child with a short fuse.
Totally agree.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on January 06, 2021, 02:38:18 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on January 06, 2021, 01:38:37 PM
Americans must be so proud of their democracy and respect of democratic process right now!  :-\

I didn't expect this to get this bad, but I am not surprised either. This was all coming...

There certainly have been many who have tried to tear down our country and Trump is no exception. He'll get his in the end. Every person who has elicited chaos and unlawfulness over order will get theirs. I don't have faith in Trump's Washington, but I do have faith that every devil has what is coming to them soon or later.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on January 06, 2021, 02:39:42 PM
Quote from: vandermolen on January 06, 2021, 02:23:15 PM
Totally agree.

The clock is running down on his presidency. Hopefully, the madness will be over soon.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on January 06, 2021, 02:42:51 PM
Quote from: krummholz on January 05, 2021, 02:01:32 PM
Pence is, indeed, impaled on the horns of a dilemma. I predict that when all is said and done, he will simply read the decision of Congress. He might make a comment that he personally considers the result invalid, but maybe not even that. I could be wrong.
you called it. Or close to it. I think he's a worm, but even he couldn't bring himself to wear the hat and bells. Haven't seen Todd around here, BTW.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Brahmsian on January 06, 2021, 02:46:59 PM
Quote from: milk on January 06, 2021, 02:42:51 PM
Haven't seen Todd around here, BTW.

Maybe he is at the "protest"?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: vandermolen on January 06, 2021, 02:48:02 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on January 06, 2021, 02:39:42 PM
The clock is running down on his presidency. Hopefully, the madness will be over soon.
+1
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 06, 2021, 03:00:13 PM
Bill Kristol tweet:
Amazing statement by the Secretary of Defense.

Note whom Secretary Miller and Chairman Milley did NOT speak to: President Trump.

We have had something close to the de facto invoking of the 25th amendment.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ErFL4FiW8AAXWwA?format=jpg&name=medium)




From Bloomberg live coverage blog:

Notable: Vermont is a very liberal state, but it has a Republican governor. And that governor, Phil Scott, says Trump should resign or be removed from office.
Governor Phil Scott
@GovPhilScott
The fabric of our democracy and the principles of our republic are under attack by the President.

Enough is enough.

President Trump should resign or be removed from office by his Cabinet, or by the Congress. 6/6
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 06, 2021, 03:13:21 PM
But does he then get his pardon?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 06, 2021, 03:15:29 PM
     Trump is locked out of Twitter for 12 hours.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: krummholz on January 06, 2021, 03:25:14 PM
There is a way to get him out of office in short order: the 25th Amendment. Would require Pence and the rest of the cabinet to be on board, I believe. I agree that a successful impeachment is still iffy - though much likelier today than it would have been even yesterday.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: krummholz on January 06, 2021, 03:32:37 PM
Quote from: T. D. on January 06, 2021, 03:00:13 PM
Notable: Vermont is a very liberal state, but it has a Republican governor. And that governor, Phil Scott, says Trump should resign or be removed from office.
Governor Phil Scott
@GovPhilScott
The fabric of our democracy and the principles of our republic are under attack by the President.

Enough is enough.

President Trump should resign or be removed from office by his Cabinet, or by the Congress. 6/6

Hooray for Phil Scott, the governor of my state. He was critical of Trump from the early days of his presidency, but tempered his criticisms and has been largely silent about Trump's behavior for a couple of years. Good to hear that he has said what he needed to say without mincing words.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 06, 2021, 03:48:11 PM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on January 06, 2021, 08:42:37 AM
I hope for the election workers that they don't have to do a recount--and for the public's sake too.

PD

Ossof's margin is now above the recount threshold. Go, Peachtree State!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on January 06, 2021, 03:49:04 PM
"To knowingly pretend a lie is true is, simply put, to lie. Doing that carefully enough to let you claim you're only raising questions only makes it even clearer that you know you're lying. Lying to people is no way to speak for them or represent them. It is a way of showing contempt for them, and of using them rather than being useful to them. This is what too many Republican politicians have chosen to do in the wake of the election. They have decided to feign anger at a problem that cannot be solved because it does not exist, and this cannot help but make them less capable of taking up real problems on behalf of their voters. And in any case, it makes them cynical liars." -  Yuval Levin

Or:

Be courteous, kind and forgiving
Be gentle and peaceful each day
Be warm and human and grateful
And have a good thing to say

Be thoughtful and trustful and childlike
Be witty and happy and wise
Be honest and love all your neighbors
Be obsequious, purple, and clairvoyant

Be pompous, obese, and eat cactus
Be dull, and boring, and omnipresent
Criticize things you don't know about
Be oblong and have your knees removed

Be tasteless, rude, and offensive
Live in a swamp and be three dimensional
Put a live chicken in your underwear
Get all excited and go to a yawning festival
- Steve Martin
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 06, 2021, 03:49:22 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on January 06, 2021, 10:44:11 AM
This is Trump's last stand, but the reality is he'll go down as one of the worst presidents in U.S. history.

The worst, by a solid margin; this just cements it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 06, 2021, 03:53:09 PM
Quote from: Herman on January 06, 2021, 11:40:19 AM
Well, the past two weeks have brought the attempted coup that was vigorously denied here, to a head.

The Capitol building has been stormed and there have been shots inside the building.

Trump had encouraged his followers to come to DC and "be wild".

The woman who was shot has died.

https://news.yahoo.com/woman-shot-capitol-armed-trump-203838306.html
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 06, 2021, 04:01:23 PM
Philip Bump:

All of this, from start to finish, is dishonest opportunism. Trump — and through omission, Cruz — misled the public in service of their own power. It's no more complicated than that. Trump and Cruz made obviously untrue claims to an aggravated electorate, knowing that the claims were inaccurate, so that they could maintain power (in Trump's case) or soon gain it (in Cruz's). Even as temperatures rose and even as Trump encouraged massive protests at the Capitol in an effort to pressure legislators, Cruz did nothing more than nod along.

Ted Cruz's electoral vote speech will live in infamy (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/01/06/ted-cruzs-electoral-vote-speech-will-live-infamy/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 06, 2021, 04:27:42 PM
From NYT via Bloomberg News:

More details from the NYT on the security situation in the Capitol today:
Maggie Haberman
@maggieNYT
NEW: Trump initially rebuffed and resisted requests to mobilize the National Guard, according to a person with knowledge of the [e]vents. It required intervention from White House officials to get it done, according to the person with knowledge of the events.
Sent via Twitter Web App.

And:

The Washington Post's editorial board is calling for Trump's removal.
"President Trump's refusal to accept his election defeat and his relentless incitement of his supporters led Wednesday to the unthinkable: an assault on the U.S. Capitol by a violent mob that overwhelmed police and drove Congress from its chambers as it was debating the counting of electoral votes. Responsibility for this act of sedition lies squarely with the president, who has shown that his continued tenure in office poses a grave threat to U.S. democracy. He should be removed."

More from Bloomberg:

Derek Wallbank Senior Breaking News Editor  dwallbank
We're starting to find out more details about some of those who stormed the Capitol. At least one of them was a Republican elected official.

Derrick Evans, a freshman lawmaker from West Virginia, livestreamed video of the incident, according to West Virginia Public Broadcasting. He later deleted at least one of the videos.


The state House speaker in W.Va., Roger Hanshaw, says Evans will have to answer to his constituents and colleagues about what happened. West Virginia Democrats have called for his resignation.

Still more:

From CBS News on the possibility of invoking the 25th amendment:

Nick Riccardi
@NickRiccardi
Retweeted
Ed O'Keefe
@edokeefe
JUST IN: "This is not news we deliver lightly," @margbrennan says as she reports: Trump Cabinet secretaries are discussing invoking the 25th Amendment to remove President Trump. Nothing formal yet presented to VP Pence.

"I'm talking about actual members of the Cabinet," she says

Sent via Twitter Web App.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on January 06, 2021, 04:51:31 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on January 06, 2021, 03:49:22 PM
The worst, by a solid margin; this just cements it.

Absolutely. He's a disgrace to our democracy.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: springrite on January 06, 2021, 04:55:59 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on January 06, 2021, 04:51:31 PM
Absolutely. He's a disgrace to our democracy.
Yes, but your home State is the State that may have saved democracy.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on January 06, 2021, 05:48:06 PM
Quote from: springrite on January 06, 2021, 04:55:59 PM
Yes, but your home State is the State that may have saved democracy.

That's quite true and I'm proud the people here pulled through and voted against those nutcases. Kelly Loeffler can go back to her multi-million dollar house (that she no doubt made off COVID) and her NYSE CEO husband. David Perdue can go back to doing what he did best: drugs. ;D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 06, 2021, 05:55:45 PM
I heard a Trumpist say they must have been undercover Antifa wearing MAGA hats.

Proof? Some of them were wearing black.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on January 06, 2021, 06:19:00 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on January 06, 2021, 05:55:45 PM
I heard a Trumpist say they must have been undercover Antifa wearing MAGA hats.
Seems unlikely.
But I found this, there's some stuff here people may want to check out:

https://twitter.com/LLinWood/status/1346946445157404674


and can make up their mind about it... guess we'll see eventually, though.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 06, 2021, 06:30:30 PM
The six senators who voted to sustain the objection of Arizona's results:
Ted Cruz
Josh Hawley
Cindy Hyde-Smith
Roger Marshall
John Kennedy
Tommy Tuberville

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/activists-contrast-treatment-blm-pro-trump-mob/2021/01/06/a59a5a0e-506a-11eb-bda4-615aaefd0555_story.html
Kid glove treatment of pro-Trump mob contrasts with strong-arm police tactics against Black Lives Matter, activists say

Emma Kinery Politics Reporter  EmmaKinery
D.C.'s police chief says 13 people were arrested today at the Capitol, none of whom were D.C. Residents, and five weapons recovered. Three of those arrested were from Maryland. The department will provide another update later this evening.

Laura Davison Congress Reporter  laurapdavison
The majority of Senate Republicans rebuked Trump in the Arizona tally vote. But in the House, most GOP members are sticking with him.

It's not an overwhelming majority, but enough to show that Trump is still the leader of his party.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 06, 2021, 07:14:15 PM
As Jonathan Swift said in Gulliver's Travels:

I desired that the Senate of Rome might appear before me in one large chamber, and a modern representative, in counterview, in another. The first seemed to be an assembly of heroes and demi-gods; the other, a knot of pedlars, pick-pockets, highwaymen, and bullies.

Wonder what JS would have thought of the current US House of Representatives... :laugh:

Derek Wallbank Senior Breaking News Editor  dwallbank
Final vote in the House: 121 to object to Arizona's electoral vote, 303 to uphold it. Most Republicans voted to object.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: geralmar on January 06, 2021, 11:15:36 PM
(https://i.postimg.cc/rpBzkmYG/Jd04Plb.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 06, 2021, 11:47:12 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on January 06, 2021, 03:53:09 PM
The woman who was shot has died.

Four people have died. Trump will be very happy about this.

He loves Americans dying. That's always been transparant.

This, of course, in addition to the nearly 4000 dying of Covid yesterday. He loves that, too.

If he is not welcome in Scotland I guess he'll go to Dubai or Moscow straight away.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 06, 2021, 11:53:32 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on January 06, 2021, 05:55:45 PM
I heard a Trumpist say they must have been undercover Antifa wearing MAGA hats.

Proof? Some of them were wearing black.

This, and most likely Trump people (such as Cruz) will be engaging in massive false equivalencies, such as that thse riots kind of balance the Portland riots (remember? the one where the whole city was supposedly torn down by antifa, even though the city's still there?).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on January 07, 2021, 01:09:46 AM
#45 now trying to buy time (with success?) and working for some free space, in the coming weeks.

Says there'll be a peaceful transition, repeats fraud views, and ..."While this represents the end of the greatest first term in presidential history, it's only the beginning of our fight to Make America Great Again!"

https://twitter.com/DanScavino/status/1347103015493361664

I'm somewhat amazed by the slowness in parts of the system. Did not hear #45's afternoon speech, but followed various journalists' live twitter reports and comments (one of the better-informed ones is https://twitter.com/SethAbramson). #45 mentioned a march to the Capitol from early on, and even the first time, the later, chaotic scenes could be seen as a likely turn of events.

#45 instigated the seizure, and he was at first enthusiastic about it, reports now say. He also delayed the National Guard, Pence seems to have authorized it. Giuliani tried for Congress to start further delays, but he left his message on the wrong senator's phone, and it was then leaked ... you can't make this stuff up.

And BTW policemen have been filmed opening the fences for the mob on the stairs, and at least one of them joining their selfies ...

A positive thing is that nowadays, practically all individuals, movements and developments can be identified and mapped, via the social media footage etc., by the authorities and the press. Lots of participants filmed their own crimes and activities. Even Bellingcat, for instance, skilled in such work, seems to have initiated a project for it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 07, 2021, 05:11:47 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/07/mick-mulvaney-resigns-from-trump-administration-expects-others-to-follow.html

WASHINGTON — Mick Mulvaney, President Donald Trump's former chief of staff, told CNBC on Thursday he has resigned as special U.S. envoy to Northern Ireland.

"I called [Secretary of State] Mike Pompeo last night to let him know I was resigning from that. I can't do it. I can't stay," Mick Mulvaney said in an exclusive interview on "Squawk Box."

"Those who choose to stay, and I have talked with some of them, are choosing to stay because they're worried the president might put someone worse in," Mulvaney said. But he said other officials may resign after Wednesday's riot at the U.S. Capitol.

An administration official confirmed to CNBC's Eamon Javers that National Security Advisor Robert O'Brien was considering resigning over the insurrection. O'Brien's deputy, Matthew Pottinger, has reportedly resigned. Stephanie Grisham, chief of staff for first lady Melania Trump, and Sarah Matthews, White House deputy press secretary, resigned Wednesday.

"We didn't sign up for what you saw last night," Mulvaney said.
...
Mulvaney, a former congressman from South Carolina and a tea party favorite, also had served as director of the Office of Management and Budget and director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau in the Trump administration.
...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on January 07, 2021, 07:08:43 AM
There has been a lot of activity in this forum over the past few days.  I really do not have the time to check all of the activity here.  I have not had the time to review every post.

I would like to mention over a year ago I expressed concerns that something like what had happened yesterday could occur.  Some of the more prominent conservatives here accused me of being paranoid.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 07, 2021, 07:13:56 AM
Quote from: arpeggio on January 07, 2021, 07:08:43 AM
There has been a lot of activity in this forum over the past few days.  I really do not have the time to check all of the activity here.  I have not had the time to review every post.

I would like to mention over a year ago I expressed concerns that something like what had happened yesterday could occur.  Some of the more prominent conservatives here accused me of being paranoid.

Although loth to consider the possibility, not even the Brain Trust can be right all the time.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on January 07, 2021, 07:24:29 AM
Jon Farina's footage is badass! Jordan Chariton gave him a bonus for it. Yesterday I watched David Pakman's lifestream when things happened and he was watching Status Coup's stream by Jon Farina. David called it a Trumpist stream and got massive backlash for it. Jordan Chariton was really pissed off and David apologized. How David Pakman didn't know Status Coup is amazing!  :o

Man, I am trying so hard to not follow US politics and then this happens! I didn't sleep last night!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 07, 2021, 07:26:01 AM
Quote from: arpeggio on January 07, 2021, 07:08:43 AM
There has been a lot of activity in this forum over the past few days.  I really do not have the time to check all of the activity here.  I have not had the time to review every post.

I would like to mention over a year ago I expressed concerns that something like what had happened yesterday could occur.  Some of the more prominent conservatives here accused me of being paranoid.

Indeed, we were ridiculed by Mr the Facts Are Mine for being deranged.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on January 07, 2021, 08:02:48 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on January 07, 2021, 01:09:46 AM
#45 now trying to buy time (with success?) and working for some free space, in the coming weeks.

Says there'll be a peaceful transition, repeats fraud views, and ..."While this represents the end of the greatest first term in presidential history, it's only the beginning of our fight to Make America Great Again!"

https://twitter.com/DanScavino/status/1347103015493361664

I'm somewhat amazed by the slowness in parts of the system. Did not hear #45's afternoon speech, but followed various journalists' live twitter reports and comments (one of the better-informed ones is https://twitter.com/SethAbramson). #45 mentioned a march to the Capitol from early on, and even the first time, the later, chaotic scenes could be seen as a likely turn of events.

#45 instigated the seizure, and he was at first enthusiastic about it, reports now say. He also delayed the National Guard, Pence seems to have authorized it. Giuliani tried for Congress to start further delays, but he left his message on the wrong senator's phone, and it was then leaked ... you can't make this stuff up.

And BTW policemen have been filmed opening the fences for the mob on the stairs, and at least one of them joining their selfies ...

A positive thing is that nowadays, practically all individuals, movements and developments can be identified and mapped, via the social media footage etc., by the authorities and the press. Lots of participants filmed their own crimes and activities. Even Bellingcat, for instance, skilled in such work, seems to have initiated a project for it.

Someone posted a Tiktok showing the mob overwhelming police and forcing there way in. Another showed a police officer (who was black, probably a very relevant detail here) being forced up an interior stairway by members of the mob. So obviously not all Capitol police reacted the same way.

A point that may get lost: the DC police is under the control of the city (Mayor Bowser). They are not responsible for security on the Capitol grounds: that's the Capitol Police, who are part of the Federal government, and the upper levels of their chain of command are directly or indirectly Trump appointments.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 07, 2021, 08:15:26 AM
It's pretty clear these Trumpists in command of the Capitol police had made sure they would be understaffed and underequipped for the day. Out of the same playbook as underequipping medics in the beginning of the epidemic.

Apparently it was Pence who called for the National Guard, because Trump has not been engaged with any gvt business since late October. It's either watching himself on TV or playing golf.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on January 07, 2021, 08:24:22 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 07, 2021, 08:15:26 AM
It's pretty clear these Trumpists in command of the Capitol police had made sure they would be understaffed and underequipped for the day. Out of the same playbook as underequipping medics in the beginning of the epidemic.

Apparently it was Pence who called for the National Guard, because Trump has not been engaged with any gvt business since late October. It's either watching himself on TV or playing golf.

It's also quite possible that since Trumpworld thinks only leftists riot, they convinced themselves that all the threats were just blather and didn't think there would be an actual riot (or would act like the antilockdown ones in Michigan, who scared the heck out of everyone and shouted, but didn't actively interfere [if my memory is correct] with the legislature doing its business).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on January 07, 2021, 08:52:06 AM
- "Trump supporters planned their assault on the Capitol in plain sight - but DC police were unprepared". A good piece.
https://www.rawstory.com/trump-supporter-on-the-capitol/

- clearly understaffed police, "the moment it all began":
https://twitter.com/PhilipinDC/status/1347028917685800961

- A lot of the protagonists have already been identified and described by the media. They are long-time activists and openly declared fans of #45.

- Impeachment and 25th Amendment procedures being worked upon, but it's unclear, if they'll succeed.

- #45 allegedly heading for Camp David in the weekend. Some wild rumours also about him being elsewhere too.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 07, 2021, 08:56:35 AM
Quote from: JBS on January 07, 2021, 08:24:22 AM
It's also quite possible that since Trumpworld thinks only leftists riot, they convinced themselves that all the threats were just blather and didn't think there would be an actual riot (or would act like the antilockdown ones in Michigan, who scared the heck out of everyone and shouted, but didn't actively interfere [if my memory is correct] with the legislature doing its business).

Aye, the blinders in Trumpworld are something else.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Brahmsian on January 07, 2021, 09:09:29 AM
Quote from: arpeggio on January 07, 2021, 07:08:43 AM
I would like to mention over a year ago I expressed concerns that something like what had happened yesterday could occur.  Some of the more prominent conservatives here accused me of being paranoid.

I'm sure they now see the light. Yet, I doubt they would ever come on here to admit it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 07, 2021, 09:14:53 AM
To see the light, one must wish to see light.

Separately:

The new articles of impeachment circulating among House Judiciary Democrats argue that Trump committed high crimes and misdemeanors and violated his oath to defend the Constitution and faithfully execute the office of the presidency by inciting Wednesday's violence.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 07, 2021, 10:06:15 AM
     The storming of Capitol Hill was organized on social media. (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/06/us/politics/protesters-storm-capitol-hill-building.html)

Just after 1 p.m., when President Trump ended his speech to protesters in Washington by calling for them to march on Congress, hundreds of echoing calls to storm the building were made by his supporters online.

On social media sites used by the far-right, such as Gab and Parler, directions on which streets to take to avoid the police and which tools to bring to help pry open doors were exchanged in comments. At least a dozen people posted about carrying guns into the halls of Congress.

Calls for violence against members of Congress and for pro-Trump movements to retake the Capitol building have been circulating online for months. Bolstered by Mr. Trump, who has courted fringe movements like QAnon and the Proud Boys, groups have openly organized on social media networks and recruited others to their cause.


On Gab, they documented going into the offices of members of Congress, including that of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Dozens posted about searching for Vice President Mike Pence, who had been the target of Mr. Trump's ire earlier in the day.

At 2:24 p.m., after Mr. Trump tweeted that Mr. Pence "didn't have the courage to do what should have been done," dozens of messages on Gab called for those inside the Capitol building to hunt down the vice president. In videos uploaded to the channel, protesters could be heard chanting "Where is Pence?"
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 07, 2021, 10:23:02 AM
First Cabinet-level resignation:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-07/transportation-secretary-elaine-chao-resigns-in-wake-of-protests
McConnell's wife, Transportation

And

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-polices-tepid-response-to-the-capitol-breach-wasnt-an-aberration/

From The Nation: "This is not America," a woman said to a small group, her voice shaking. "They're shooting at us. They're supposed to shoot BLM, but they're shooting the patriots."

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-07/trump-rioters-weren-t-policed-like-blm-protesters

Horrified onlookers could not help but notice the striking contrast between the police response to Trump's insurrection and the hard fist that met Black Lives Matter protests in June. During largely peaceful protests on June 1, D.C. police officers arrested 289 people, with federal officers tear-gassing demonstrators in Lafayette Square to clear the way for Trump's infamous Bible photo-op at St. John's Episcopal Church. By comparison, local police in Washington, D.C., who secured the Capitol grounds on Wednesday and enforced the 6 p.m. citywide curfew have made only 68 arrests as of Thursday morning.


During a press conference Wednesday, D.C. Police Chief Robert Contee III defended the number of arrests. "As far as the Metropolitan Police Department's response, I'm very comfortable with that," Contee said. "We had to contain the situation that we were dealing with and the moment we were able to contain the situation, [police] were able to make arrests."

Other scenes illustrated the chasm in the police response: A TikTok clip appeared to show Capitol Police opening barricades for pro-Trump agitators. One officer in riot gear helped a Trump supporter down the steps. Even as police fired tear gas and flash grenades into the churning crowd, others gave departing Trump supporters directions to their cars or hotels. This reporter overheard a Capitol Police officer apologize, unprompted, to would-be insurrectionists as they left the still-chaotic scene at the Capitol grounds: "Sorry about all of this. Thanks for your patience."

...

Perhaps the most striking disparity between the two events was the response from the White House. In June, Trump was eager to use the Insurrection Act to deploy some 10,000 troops to Washington and other cities to suppress Black Lives Matter demonstrations. Yesterday, when an actual insurrection arrived, his message was different. To the rioters ransacking the Capitol, in a video message since deleted by Twitter and Facebook, Trump said, "I love you."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 07, 2021, 10:29:20 AM
Watching CNN at the moment.  Nancy Pelosi is speaking.  Congress may go forth with impeachment if 25th amendment isn't invoked.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/pelosi-if-trump-not-removed-under-25th-amendment-congress-may-go-forward-with-impeachment/2021/01/07/f4de910e-511c-11eb-a1f5-fdaf28cfca90_story.html
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on January 07, 2021, 10:37:08 AM
Quote from: T. D. on January 07, 2021, 10:23:02 AM
First Cabinet-level resignation:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-07/transportation-secretary-elaine-chao-resigns-in-wake-of-protests
McConnell's wife, Transportation
(...)

Some are pointing out that Chao's resignation also means an escape for her, in any discussions in the cabinet about forcing #45 to resign, including that of the 25th amendment.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 07, 2021, 10:38:07 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on January 07, 2021, 10:29:20 AM
Watching CNN at the moment.  Nancy Pelosi is speaking.  Congress may go forth with impeachment if 25th amendment isn't invoked.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/pelosi-if-trump-not-removed-under-25th-amendment-congress-may-go-forward-with-impeachment/2021/01/07/f4de910e-511c-11eb-a1f5-fdaf28cfca90_story.html

From what I've read, the 25th Amendment is too murky to work. Intended for medical situations.
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-01-07/does-the-25th-amendment-apply-to-trump-quite-possibly
"Impairment" is not precisely defined.

And impeachment won't pass.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 07, 2021, 11:57:28 AM
Quote from: T. D. on January 07, 2021, 10:38:07 AM
From what I've read, the 25th Amendment is too murky to work. Intended for medical situations.
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-01-07/does-the-25th-amendment-apply-to-trump-quite-possibly
"Impairment" is not precisely defined.

And impeachment won't pass.
Well, medical also includes mental health issues, non?  And after what happened yesterday and his role in it, maybe?  :-\  One can hope anyway....

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 07, 2021, 11:58:10 AM
Quote from: T. D. on January 07, 2021, 10:38:07 AM
From what I've read, the 25th Amendment is too murky to work. Intended for medical situations.
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-01-07/does-the-25th-amendment-apply-to-trump-quite-possibly (https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-01-07/does-the-25th-amendment-apply-to-trump-quite-possibly)
"Impairment" is not precisely defined.

Yes, it doesn't really work in the case of "The President cannot be bothered to uphold the law."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on January 07, 2021, 12:04:34 PM
My wife and I just had a wild experience.

We just had a plumber visit because we had problems with our toilets (Note: This plumber was Covid compliant.  He took many precautions like disinfecting the areas he worked in.)

We had a copy of the Washington Post on our kitchen table.  On the front page it had a picture of one of the insurgents carrying a Confederate Flag.

While we were writing out the check the plumber look at the paper and said, "Do you know who that is?"

We said no.

His response was that the man in the photo was ANTIFA. 

The plumber was a Trumpster who believe that all of the violence was caused by ANTIFA infiltrators.

OK. Of course we did not argue with the guy.  We just paid him and sent him on his way (He was a good plumber).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 07, 2021, 12:13:25 PM
Quote from: arpeggio on January 07, 2021, 12:04:34 PM
My wife and I just had a wild experience.

We just had a plumber visit because we had problems with our toilets (Note: This plumber was Covid compliant.  He took many precautions like disinfecting the areas he worked in.)

We had a copy of the Washington Post on our kitchen table.  On the front page it had a picture of one of the insurgents carrying a Confederate Flag.

While we were writing out the check the plumber look at the paper and said, "Do you know who that is?"

We said no.

His response was that he man in the photo was ANTIFA. 

The plumber was a Trumpster who believe that all of the violence was caused by ANTIFA infiltrators.

OK. Of course we did not argue with the guy.  We just paid him and sent him on his way (He was a good plumber).

Ayyup; they're all marinated in the Right-Wing Disinformation Ecosystem.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on January 07, 2021, 12:19:32 PM
Quote from: T. D. on January 07, 2021, 10:38:07 AM
From what I've read, the 25th Amendment is too murky to work. Intended for medical situations.
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-01-07/does-the-25th-amendment-apply-to-trump-quite-possibly
"Impairment" is not precisely defined.

And impeachment won't pass.

From what I've heard on NPR today the 25th amendment move doesn't have to "work." Between the time it's invoked and adjudicated by Congress the president would be restricted from taking any executive actions. He would be effectively removed from power for the rest of his term.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 07, 2021, 12:27:39 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on January 07, 2021, 12:19:32 PM
From what I've heard on NPR today the 25th amendment move doesn't have to "work." Between the time it's invoked and adjudicated by Congress the president would be restricted from taking any executive actions. He would be effectively removed from power for the rest of his term.
I had forgotten that!  Is there anything about the maximum length of time for which that that could be in effect?  I suspect not.

The main question being, would (if I'm understanding the rules correctly) 8 members of his cabinet plus Pence vote for it?  From what I understand, there are 15 members in his cabinet, so a majority would be 8 plus Vice-President Pence's vote.  Am I figuring this out correctly?

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 07, 2021, 12:42:38 PM
Quote from: MusicTurner on January 07, 2021, 10:37:08 AM
Some are some pointing out that Chao's resignation also means an escape for her, in any discussions in the cabinet about forcing #45 to resign, including that of the 25th amendment.

Interesting. This adds a fascinating strategic aspect, but makes it almost impossible for me to assess what might happen!

For instance: last night "National Security Advisor" (good job, Robbie!) Robt. O'Brien leaked that he was "considering resignation." At the time, I read that as candy-ass bullshit designed to make it appear as if he has a conscience (anyone serious about resigning would simply do so - it's like filing lawsuits in that respect), and that he had no intent of actually resigning.
Now we have additional game-theoretic angles. Does O'Brien really want to resign, but stays on lest he be replaced by someone worse (see Mick Mulvaney remarks in his resignation story)? Or does he want to stay on so that he can invoke the 25th Amendment (yeah, right  :laugh: )?

Maybe fun to speculate, but completely futile IMO. I get lost in the various rabbit holes.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 07, 2021, 12:42:56 PM
Chas Sykes: Even after the mayhem and death of the attack on the Capitol a stunning 138 GOP representatives voted to throw out millions of votes in Pennsylvania.
"These objections don't deserve an ounce of respect, not an ounce," said Congressman Conor Lamb (D-PA). "A woman died out there tonight and you're making these objections. Let's be clear about what happened in this chamber today – invaders came in for the first time since the War of 1812. They desecrated these halls, in this chamber, and practically every inch of ground where we work."
"We know that that attack today, it didn't materialize out of nowhere, it was inspired by lies, the same lies that you're hearing in this room tonight." (His remarks almost started a fist-fight on the floor of the House.)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 07, 2021, 12:44:27 PM
Quote from: MusicTurner on January 07, 2021, 10:37:08 AM
Some are some pointing out that Chao's resignation also means an escape for her, in any discussions in the cabinet about forcing #45 to resign, including that of the 25th amendment.

Has the look of pure self-interest.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 07, 2021, 01:11:00 PM
Cori Bush introduces legislation to sanction, remove all House members who supported election challenges (https://thehill.com/homenews/house/532990-cori-bush-introduces-legislation-to-sanction-remove-all-house-members-who)

"I believe the Republican members of Congress who have incited this domestic terror attack through their attempts to overturn the election must face consequences," the progressive lawmaker tweeted. "They have broken their sacred Oath of Office. I will be introducing a resolution calling for their expulsion."


Article I, section 5:

Each House [of Congress] may determine the Rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two-thirds, expel a member.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 07, 2021, 01:34:55 PM
Quote from: vandermolen on January 06, 2021, 12:58:38 PM
Very sorry to see what's going on in Washington at the moment.
Sorry for the delay in responding to your post.

I do really appreciate your kind and thoughtful comments here Jeffrey.  It was brutal to watch.  This is horrible on so many levels.

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on January 07, 2021, 01:55:50 PM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on January 07, 2021, 12:27:39 PM
I had forgotten that!  Is there anything about the maximum length of time for which that that could be in effect?  I suspect not.

The main question being, would (if I'm understanding the rules correctly) 8 members of his cabinet plus Pence vote for it?  From what I understand, there are 15 members in his cabinet, so a majority would be 8 plus Vice-President Pence's vote.  Am I figuring this out correctly?

PD

I think your count is correct. But do those resigning still figure in the count?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 07, 2021, 02:20:25 PM
That Washington Times article that Matt Gaetz said reported facial recognition soft ware showed Antifa among the rioters now has this at the top of the page:

"Correction: An earlier version of this story incorrectly stated that XRVision facial recognition software identified Antifa members among rioters who stormed the Capitol Wednesday. XRVision did not identify any Antifa members. The Washington Times apologizes to XRVision for the error."

The article now opens with:

"Facial recognition software has identified neo-Nazis and other extremists as participants in Wednesday's assault on the U.S. Capitol."

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/jan/6/xrvision-firm-claims-antifa-infiltrated-protesters/


that's okay guys, no harm no foul


This story covered in The Verge:

Matt Gaetz's antifa-detecting facial recognition story is complete nonsense
The company says the photo showed neo-Nazis and a QAnon figure (https://www.theverge.com/2021/1/7/22218601/matt-gaetz-antifa-capitol-hill-riot-xrvision-facial-recognition-washington-times-story-false)

[...]""XRVision didn't generate any composites or detections for the Washington Times or for any 'retired military officer,' nor did it authorize them to make any such claims or representations," Apelbaum wrote. According to his post, XRVision did analyze video footage of the riots, and the company identified "several individuals" in a composite it shared with a "handful" of outsiders. However, they were not linked with antifa.

We concluded that two of the individuals (Jason Tankersley and Matthew Heimbach) were affiliated with the Maryland Skinheads and the National Socialist Movements. These two are known Nazi organizations; they are not Antifa. The third individual identified (Jake Angeli) is an actor with some QAnon promotion history. Again, no Antifa identification was made for him either.

Angeli, who frequently appears at protests in a horned helmet and face paint, is known as the "Q Shaman" and is affiliated with the conspiracy movement QAnon. Angeli previously participated in a documentary called "The Patriots," in which he espoused an extreme pro-Trump ideology rather than anything aligned with antifa."[...]

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 07, 2021, 02:56:34 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on January 07, 2021, 01:11:00 PM
Cori Bush introduces legislation to sanction, remove all House members who supported election challenges (https://thehill.com/homenews/house/532990-cori-bush-introduces-legislation-to-sanction-remove-all-house-members-who)

"I believe the Republican members of Congress who have incited this domestic terror attack through their attempts to overturn the election must face consequences," the progressive lawmaker tweeted. "They have broken their sacred Oath of Office. I will be introducing a resolution calling for their expulsion."


Article I, section 5:

Each House [of Congress] may determine the Rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two-thirds, expel a member.

I think this would be highly unlikely. The House barely exceeded the two-thirds ratio (282-138) when denying the Pennsylvania elector objection. Do you believe that essentially all of the GOP Reps who opposed the objection would vote to expel the GOP reps who objected? I find that inconceivable.

The Senate objection vote might look more favorable (92-7), but I simply don't believe that enough Repugs would vote to expel fellow Repugs, no matter how repugnant.

How about stirring the pot a little?
Pardons!

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-07/trump-prepares-pardon-list-for-aides-and-kin-and-maybe-himself

President Donald Trump has prepared a sweeping list of individuals he's hoping to pardon in the final days of his administration that includes senior White House officials, family members, prominent rappers -- and possibly himself, according to people familiar with the matter.

Trump is hoping to announce the pardons on Jan. 19 -- his final full day in office -- and his ideas are currently being vetted by senior advisers and the White House counsel's office, the people said.

The biggest question facing his legal team may be whether the president has the authority to pardon himself, as he has discussed in recent weeks with top aides, according to the people familiar with his conversations. Trump has previously claimed the power, though it's a matter of legal dispute and has never before been attempted by a president.

A self-pardon could also prove a major political liability and hamstring another presidential bid, with opponents sure to suggest the self-pardon amounted to an admission that he thought he might be prosecuted for breaking the law.

Preemptive pardons are under discussion for top White House officials who have not been charged with crimes, including Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, senior adviser Stephen Miller, personnel chief John McEntee, and social media director Dan Scavino.

The president's eldest daughter, Ivanka Trump, her husband, Jared Kushner, who both hold White House positions, are also under consideration, the people said. Trump's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani has also discussed the issue of a pardon with the president.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 07, 2021, 03:09:00 PM
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/07/state-department-official-who-said-trump-is-entirely-unfit-to-remain-in-office-fired.html

WASHINGTON – The White House fired the State Department official who said President Donald Trump was "entirely unfit to remain in office" following riots at the U.S. Capitol, a person familiar with the matter told NBC News.

In a pair of tweets Wednesday, Gabriel Noronha said Trump "needs to go" after the president encouraged a mob to storm the U.S. Capitol.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on January 07, 2021, 04:45:11 PM
One of the police officers injured yesterday has died. I presume it's the one who had been listed as critically injured. A federal murder investigation has been opened.

I hope the FBI holds off arresting any of these mob members until the 20th.  Because once arrested, Trump will know who to pardon.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on January 07, 2021, 05:05:12 PM
New short video with #45 reading from a teleprompter, is called a parade of open lies about recent events, in which he tries to defend himself against a growing threat of bipartisan impeachment. Other, new statements to the press by McEnany are characterized in the same way.

A police officer was also killed by the mob. This expands the amount of prosecution content, maybe even for #45.

More people leaving the administration, including Betsy deVos, who made a very critical, public statement.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 07, 2021, 05:34:01 PM
Quote from: MusicTurner on January 07, 2021, 05:05:12 PM
New short video with #45 reading from a teleprompter, is called a parade of open lies about recent events, in which he tries to defend himself against a growing threat of bipartisan impeachment. Other, new statements to the press by McEnany are characterized in the same way.

A police officer was also killed by the mob. This expands the amount of prosecution content, maybe even for #45.

More people leaving the administration, including Betsy deVos, who made a very critical, public statement.

Just read (Bloomberg) a story with time stamp 8:56 PM EST denying the police fatality:

Capitol Police said reports that an officer died from injuries sustained during Wednesday's attack on the building were inaccurate. Representative Dean Phillips of Minnesota had said on Twitter he was advised an officer had died.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: springrite on January 07, 2021, 05:34:44 PM
Quote from: JBS on January 07, 2021, 04:45:11 PM
One of the police officers injured yesterday has died. I presume it's the one who had been listed as critically injured. A federal murder investigation has been opened.

I hope the FBI holds off arresting any of these mob members until the 20th.  Because once arrested, Trump will know who to pardon.
I would certainly arrest the person before the 20th and dare Trump to pardon him.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on January 07, 2021, 06:52:46 PM
Quote from: T. D. on January 07, 2021, 05:34:01 PM
Just read (Bloomberg) a story with time stamp 8:56 PM EST denying the police fatality:

Capitol Police said reports that an officer died from injuries sustained during Wednesday's attack on the building were inaccurate. Representative Dean Phillips of Minnesota had said on Twitter he was advised an officer had died.

Latest version of the story: the officer, who was beaten up with a fire extinguisher, is on life support, and the hospital is waiting for family members to arrive from out of town before taking him* off the life support.

*One Twitter report referred to the police officer as a female.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: krummholz on January 08, 2021, 03:38:35 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on January 07, 2021, 12:27:39 PM
I had forgotten that!  Is there anything about the maximum length of time for which that that could be in effect?  I suspect not.

The main question being, would (if I'm understanding the rules correctly) 8 members of his cabinet plus Pence vote for it?  From what I understand, there are 15 members in his cabinet, so a majority would be 8 plus Vice-President Pence's vote.  Am I figuring this out correctly?

PD

It's 21 days, assuming 45 objects to the declaration of inability, and the VP + Cabinet renew their objections immediately. Congress has 21 days to decide the issue - so they could just run out the clock.

But that's assuming that Pence would be able to relieve Trump of his office. Section 4 of the 25A is convoluted and confusing, and not entirely explicit on who is Acting President in the interim, the VP or the actual elected President. Trump would certainly refuse to hand over power, and the issue would likely end up before the SCOTUS. I think the ruling would probably go against Trump, but it's very possible that it would take longer than the time remaining in his term.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 08, 2021, 03:51:53 AM
The best course of action is prosecuting the hell out of everyone who entered the Capitol illegally.

Put that horned guy behind bars for five years and he'll never paint his face again.

Trump and Giuliani ('trial by combat') need to be prosecuted as accessories to manslaughter. Five dead.

Impeachment and the 25th aren't going to cut it.

Biden will have changed his mind about not-prosecuting his predecessor after Jan 6.

The way that Matt Gaetz is lying about Antifa stormed the Capitol just shows what despicable people these radical Republicans are.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: krummholz on January 08, 2021, 04:55:04 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 08, 2021, 03:51:53 AM
Impeachment and the 25th aren't going to cut it.

I don't think anyone is arguing that impeachment or the 25th should be the last word. The reason to force him out of office now is to prevent him from doing any more damage before his term ends. I doubt there is any chance he could be forced out in the next 12 days though. And impeachment would also disqualify him from ever running for President again (assuming he is convicted in the Senate), which is why retroactive impeachment is being discussed -- not sure whether a felony conviction would also serve that purpose, but I should expect so.

I agree though, everyone directly involved should be prosecuted - the insurrectionists of course, and Trump and Giuliani who helped to incite the insurrection. Trump, whether or not he is successfully impeached - they're entirely different processes.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 08, 2021, 05:56:17 AM
Wow.
From today's Wall St. Journal. A long-time Repug publication owned by the abhorrent Rupert Murdoch:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trumps-final-days-11610062773

Impeachment is justified and Cheeto Mussolini should resign to avoid same.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 08, 2021, 06:12:36 AM
Quote from: T. D. on January 08, 2021, 05:56:17 AM
Wow.
From today's Wall St. Journal. A long-time Repug publication owned by the abhorrent Rupert Murdoch:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trumps-final-days-11610062773 (https://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trumps-final-days-11610062773)

Impeachment is justified and Cheeto Mussolini should resign to avoid same.

At least, the acknowledgement that Impeachment is justified. Even though the Republicans in Congress will resist, all the same.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 08, 2021, 06:30:17 AM
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-07/several-state-lawmakers-joined-observed-us-capitol-turmoil

State Del. Derrick Evans was among lawmakers from at least seven states who traveled to Washington, D.C., for demonstrations rooted in the baseless conspiracy theory that Democrat Joe Biden stole the presidential election. Wearing a helmet, Evans ultimately joined a screaming mob as it pushed its way into the Capitol building, and livestreamed himself joyfully strolling inside.

It's unclear if Evans was the only elected official to participate in what Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and many others called a "failed insurrection." It's also not known if any of them will be prosecuted.
...

Evans, a vocal conservative activist with more than 30,000 followers on Facebook, has not publicly posted on social media since issuing a statement Wednesday that he attended the events as an "independent member of the media to film history." He took his Twitter account private late Wednesday and didn't respond to emailed questions.

"At no point was Mr. Evans located in the crowd on the West side of the (Capitol) building, nor anywhere else on the Capitol grounds, where violence and destruction of property was, or had been, occurring," Bryan [his atty.] said.

In his now-deleted video, widely shared online, Evans is clamoring inside a jampacked Capitol building doorway, trying with others to push his way inside. He hollers along with other Trump loyalists and thanks a law enforcement officer for letting them in.

Strolling the grand Capitol Rotunda, where historic paintings depict the republic's founding, Evans implores others to not vandalize artwork and busts, some of which would indeed be vandalized.

"Our house!" Evans yells inside Capitol halls. "I don't know where we're going. I'm following the crowd."

Like several other political first-time winners in November's West Virginia elections, Evans swept aside a Democratic rival to win his seat representing Wayne County. High GOP turnout credited to Trump elevated down-ballot Republicans in the state and gave the party a statehouse supermajority.

The chairwoman of the state GOP, Melody Potter, declined to answer questions about Evans.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 08, 2021, 06:31:12 AM
Trump, who has falsely insisted that the reelection bid he lost was stolen from him through fraud, even ginned up the crowd of supporters with an in-person address near the White House, directing them to march on the Capitol "because you will never take back our country with weakness." Carrying Trump signs, Confederate flags, and even gallows to erect outside the building, the mob quickly overtook US Capitol Police, smashing its way into doors and windows in an attack that left four people dead and multiple law enforcement officers injured, sent lawmakers and staff scurrying to safety, and halted the certification process for hours.

The pro-Trump media world peddled the lies that fueled the Capitol mob. Fox News led the way. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/media/fox-news-blame-capitol-mob-media/2021/01/07/f15f668a-50ee-11eb-b96e-0e54447b23a1_story.html)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 08, 2021, 06:37:17 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on January 08, 2021, 06:31:12 AM
Trump, who has falsely insisted that the reelection bid he lost was stolen from him through fraud, even ginned up the crowd of supporters with an in-person address near the White House, directing them to march on the Capitol "because you will never take back our country with weakness." Carrying Trump signs, Confederate flags, and even gallows to erect outside the building, the mob quickly overtook US Capitol Police, smashing its way into doors and windows in an attack that left four people dead and multiple law enforcement officers injured, sent lawmakers and staff scurrying to safety, and halted the certification process for hours.

The pro-Trump media world peddled the lies that fueled the Capitol mob. Fox News led the way. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/media/fox-news-blame-capitol-mob-media/2021/01/07/f15f668a-50ee-11eb-b96e-0e54447b23a1_story.html)

QuoteThe failure to prevent the coup attempt at the Capitol was a prime example of the federal government's ongoing failure to take seriously the threat posed by far-right extremists and those egged on to join their cause by the president, who has eagerly embraced the same conspiracy theories and rhetoric that fuel them. Even the DHS's own threat assessment was delayed last fall, according to a whistle-blower complaint, in an effort to avoid clashing with the Trump administration's political narrative.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 08, 2021, 06:54:32 AM
From the "Is that a threat or a promise?" department.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/08/biden-inauguration-trump-will-not-attend-on-jan-20.html

Surprise.  :laugh:

Who wants the execrable MF anyway? Cheeto's presence would irretrievably taint any respectable gathering.

It appears Pence won't attend, either:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-08/trump-says-he-won-t-attend-biden-s-inauguration-on-jan-20-kjogm7z7

Pence's office hasn't said whether he'll attend Biden's inauguration, though a spokesman for Pence appeared to deny a report in Politico on Thursday saying he planned to be there.

"You can't attend something you haven't received an invitation to," Pence spokesman Devin O'Malley said on Twitter.

A spokeswoman for Biden's inaugural committee told Gray Media Group Inc. that there is not customarily a formal invitation to outgoing presidents and vice presidents, and that the vice president's office had not informed the committee if Pence planned to attend.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 08, 2021, 07:06:25 AM
Quote from: krummholz on January 08, 2021, 03:38:35 AM
It's 21 days, assuming 45 objects to the declaration of inability, and the VP + Cabinet renew their objections immediately. Congress has 21 days to decide the issue - so they could just run out the clock.

But that's assuming that Pence would be able to relieve Trump of his office. Section 4 of the 25A is convoluted and confusing, and not entirely explicit on who is Acting President in the interim, the VP or the actual elected President. Trump would certainly refuse to hand over power, and the issue would likely end up before the SCOTUS. I think the ruling would probably go against Trump, but it's very possible that it would take longer than the time remaining in his term.
Thank you for the further information Krummholz.

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 08, 2021, 07:18:53 AM
Quote from: T. D. on January 08, 2021, 05:56:17 AM
Wow.
From today's Wall St. Journal. A long-time Repug publication owned by the abhorrent Rupert Murdoch:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trumps-final-days-11610062773

Impeachment is justified and Cheeto Mussolini should resign to avoid same.

Resigning between Jan 10 and 19th would also create an opening for Pence to pardon Trump.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 08, 2021, 07:20:53 AM
https://www.yahoo.com/news/six-republican-lawmakers-among-rioters-225945766.html

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/meghan-mccain-slams-scum-earth-capitol-mob-calls-republicans-invoke-25th-amendment-204608298.html

...
"He is clearly a president who has turned into a mad king," she said. "I'm calling on all Republicans and conservatives who still have clout, we have to invoke the 25th Amendment. We cannot withstand this."
...
McCain expanded her criticism to include the president's daughter and adviser Ivanka Trump, who in a now-deleted tweet addressed the mob as patriots. McCain was outraged, given that her father, the late senator and a frequent target of Trump, was a veteran.

"Ivanka Trump called these people patriots. I am a patriot. I come from a patriotic family. I come from a family of service," she said, adding, "You are hurting our country. You are becoming a national embarrassment, and we have to get [Trump] out immediately because this cannot stand."

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/08/pelosi-prevent-trump-from-launching-nuclear-strike.html

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Friday that she had spoken to Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mark Milley about available precautions that would block "an unstable president" — Donald Trump — from "ordering a nuclear strike," or even accessing nuclear launch codes and starting other military hostilities.

"The situation of this unhinged President could not be more dangerous, and we must do everything that we can to protect the American people from his unbalanced assault on our country and our democracy," Pelosi, D-Calif., said in a letter to fellow Democratic lawmakers.

The Pentagon and the Office of the Joint Chiefs of Staff did not respond to CNBC's request for comment.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 08, 2021, 01:33:30 PM
Twitter to wipe Trump's followers before Biden handover (https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-55426685)

"Twitter has confirmed that the official US presidential accounts will be wiped of their millions of followers before being transferred to the Biden administration.

Mr Biden's team "fought" the plan, but the social media giant said its decision was "unequivocal".

The move marks a reversal from the last transition.

Twitter agreed to Donald Trump's request in 2016 to inherit Barack Obama's millions of followers."[...]
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Brahmsian on January 08, 2021, 02:35:59 PM
Twitter, Facebook and Instagram have all suspended Trump's accounts.

Twitter has suspended his account permanently.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 08, 2021, 02:38:26 PM
     Trump will be impeached again for incitement to insurrection. This is good for a number of reasons, one being that Repubs who have revealed themselves as nihilist scumbags will be given the opportunity to prove once again that they care nothing for this country and the welfare of Americans, including the people who vote for them.

     I want every one of them on record. Sen. Collins, the lesson Trump learned was that he could get away with anything because you had his back along with every Repub Senator except Mitt Romney. How has that worked out?

     https://www.youtube.com/v/yBtcDQpENZw&ab_channel=GlobalNews

"Now, you may be asking how much damage can he really do in the next several months until the election? A lot. A lot of damage."

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 08, 2021, 02:44:33 PM
Decent analysis if you can read it w/o paywall (I'm a subscriber):

https://www.economist.com/united-states/2021/01/08/why-donald-trump-will-serve-out-his-remaining-term-in-office

Conclusion:

The most likely outcome, then, is that Mr Trump remains in office until the end of his term, banned from Facebook but still in command of America's nuclear arsenal. This would also mean, of course, that he is free to run for the office again should he wish to do so. That might seem far-fetched now, but it is worth noting that just two months ago Mr Trump received the second-highest number of votes in American history. He is a formidable manipulator of the truth: some of his fans are already saying that the violence at the Capitol was carried out by far-left Antifa radicals dressed up as Trump supporters. Far easier to accept a nonsensical explanation like this, or to minimise Mr Trump's role in the whole affair, than to accept you voted for someone who invited a bunch of thugs into the US Capitol.

All of which leaves many Americans hoping for the best over the next 12 days, and unable to do much to prevent the worst.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: geralmar on January 08, 2021, 03:14:41 PM
A little needed levity...

(https://i.postimg.cc/CLzgjBCF/Er-Nuqq-QVEAMg-QQN.png) (https://postimages.org/)

Nuclear controls are secure per House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 08, 2021, 03:40:12 PM
I read someone else refer to the nonsense legal challenges as the Coup Klutz Klan.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 08, 2021, 03:48:25 PM
Wanna feel nauseated? Watch this shit:

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/08/capitol-riots-video-shows-trump-family-before-rally.html

On a lighter side, this oughta be fun:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-08/sidney-powell-sued-by-dominion-voting-over-election-fraud-claims

Former Trump campaign lawyer Sidney Powell was sued for defamation by the voting-machine company she repeatedly placed at the center of a vast and unfounded election conspiracy that she claimed switched votes to favor President-elect Joe Biden.

The complaint filed Friday by Dominion Voting Systems Inc. seeks $1.3 billion from Powell, who filed numerous unsuccessful court cases seeking to overturn the election results. She was dumped by the Trump campaign not long after a Nov. 19 press conference in which she claimed that agents from Iran and China infiltrated Dominion's voting machines to help Biden, and that the software had ties to Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez, who died in 2013.

"Powell's wild accusations are demonstrably false," the company, based in Toronto and Denver, said in the complaint. "Acting in concert with allies and media outlets that were determined to promote a false preconceived narrative about the 2020 election, Powell launched a viral disinformation campaign about Dominion that reached millions of people and caused enormous harm to Dominion."

The case could be the first of numerous suits against individuals and media outlets accused of trashing the company's reputation by repeating or broadcasting wild conspiracy theories to explain President Donald Trump's failed bid for a second term. Trump's lead election lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, Fox News and the White House itself were among those who received letters from Dominion's attorneys in December.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 08, 2021, 05:12:29 PM
seen elsewhere:

"It's only a coup if it's from the coup d'etat region of france, otherwise it's just sparkling white nationalism"


I also just heard Michael Cohen refer to Mar-a-Lago as "Magastan", which is witty, but I wanted to reply that Magastan is what they were attempting two days ago (or for the last two months - or for the last four years)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on January 08, 2021, 05:38:03 PM
Quote from: geralmar on January 08, 2021, 05:32:44 PM

Trump is trying to sneak back on Twitter.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/twitter-deletes-new-trump-tweets-from-official-account-after-banning-him/ar-BB1cAZF7?ocid=AMZN

It would be funny except it isn't.

The POTUS tweet was deleted within 1 minute, and that account is clearly being closely watched or else is now locked down too, until Joe takes it over on the 20th.  :)

8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on January 08, 2021, 05:48:30 PM
Quote from: OrchestralNut on January 08, 2021, 02:35:59 PM
Twitter, Facebook and Instagram have all suspended Trump's accounts.

Twitter has suspended his account permanently.

In a somewhat broader-reaching action, Google has removed Parler from its app store, and Apple has given Parler 24 hours to come up with moderation policies that will be effective against violence.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 08, 2021, 06:07:12 PM
For all the jokes and so forth, I believe we're in for some scary times.
I'll be shocked if there aren't armed assaults on a number of State capitols, and wouldn't be surprised to see more Oklahoma City style bombings of Federal buildings. I almost typed Nashville in the last sentence; that seems to have been 5G- rather than political-related, so I'll add that corporate targets are possible. I hope that  various "lamestream" (in Cheetospeak) newspapers and TV networks heavily beef up security.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on January 08, 2021, 07:33:31 PM
Quote from: T. D. on January 08, 2021, 06:07:12 PM
For all the jokes and so forth, I believe we're in for some scary times.
I'll be shocked if there aren't armed assaults on a number of State capitols, and wouldn't be surprised to see more Oklahoma City style bombings of Federal buildings. I almost typed Nashville in the last sentence; that seems to have been 5G- rather than political-related, so I'll add that corporate targets are possible. I hope that  various "lamestream" (in Cheetospeak) newspapers and TV networks heavily beef up security.

And the main difference here is these people won't be tear gassed as this treatment is only reserved for the Black Lives Matter movement. ::) Anyway, from my understanding, January 16th is going to be the day when these scumbags are going to attack the capitols of these various states.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 08, 2021, 08:12:24 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on January 08, 2021, 07:33:31 PM
And the main difference here is these people won't be tear gassed as this treatment is only reserved for the Black Lives Matter movement. ::) Anyway, from my understanding, January 16th is going to be the day when these scumbags are going to attack the capitols of these various states.

Well, if they can round up all of the dreaded Antifa  >:D before then (I'd seen 1/17 as another target date), that'll solve the problem and there'll be nothing to fear.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on January 08, 2021, 08:16:01 PM
Quote from: T. D. on January 08, 2021, 08:12:24 PM
Well, if they can round up all of the dreaded Antifa  >:D before then (I'd seen 1/17 as another target date), that'll solve the problem and there'll be nothing to fear.

;D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on January 08, 2021, 08:17:45 PM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on January 08, 2021, 08:00:44 PM
Trump has been chastised temporarily, but I fully expect him to announce on January 20 that he has declared martial law and ordered the arrest and summary execution of Joe Biden on charges of treason. At least, as things stand, he won't be able to tweet his invocation of martial law and will he at a loss to figure out how to declare martial law otherwise, since no one in the White House will be willing to type up an executive order for him. Maybe hand written with a sharpie.

Hah! Yeah, I can imagine him saying "I want martial law! Now!" and then he's greeted with the sound of crickets chirping. :D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 08, 2021, 11:50:36 PM
Quote from: geralmar on January 08, 2021, 09:21:39 PM
Republican Attorneys General Association urged march on Capitol Building.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/republican-ags-group-sent-robocalls-urging-march-capitol-n1253581

I am disgusted to be a lawyer.

These people should be disbarred. You practise law, you vow to uphold the law.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 08, 2021, 11:58:11 PM
Quote from: T. D. on January 08, 2021, 06:07:12 PM
For all the jokes and so forth, I believe we're in for some scary times.
I'll be shocked if there aren't armed assaults on a number of State capitols, and wouldn't be surprised to see more Oklahoma City style bombings of Federal buildings.

Let's hope and pray he has a lot of golfing to do.

January 6 could indeed be the definitive starting point of a nativist terrorist movement; however, let's not kid ourselves. These people were busy for a much longer time, such as the bunch of dead-enders who were figuring out how to kill Gretchen Whitttmer on her doorstep.

What needs to be done first, is put every single one of these looters and lawbreakers behind bars for a long time. That horned guy is a hero, insouciantly posing for pictured as if he's totally invulnerable to the law. That illusion needs to be broken.

News, too, is that electronic devices have been stolen during the Capitol coup, making the entire national security system vulnerable.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on January 09, 2021, 04:14:12 AM
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!"
We chortle in our joy.
For it's such fun that Twitter dum
Has lost his favorite toy
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 09, 2021, 05:31:15 AM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on January 08, 2021, 05:38:03 PM
The POTUS tweet was deleted within 1 minute, and that account is clearly being closely watched or else is now locked down too, until Joe takes it over on the 20th.  :)

8)
He's become addicted to tweeting.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 09, 2021, 05:33:51 AM
Quote from: T. D. on January 08, 2021, 06:07:12 PM
For all the jokes and so forth, I believe we're in for some scary times.
I'll be shocked if there aren't armed assaults on a number of State capitols, and wouldn't be surprised to see more Oklahoma City style bombings of Federal buildings. I almost typed Nashville in the last sentence; that seems to have been 5G- rather than political-related, so I'll add that corporate targets are possible. I hope that  various "lamestream" (in Cheetospeak) newspapers and TV networks heavily beef up security.
Quote from: T. D. on January 08, 2021, 06:07:12 PM
For all the jokes and so forth, I believe we're in for some scary times.
I'll be shocked if there aren't armed assaults on a number of State capitols, and wouldn't be surprised to see more Oklahoma City style bombings of Federal buildings. I almost typed Nashville in the last sentence; that seems to have been 5G- rather than political-related, so I'll add that corporate targets are possible. I hope that  various "lamestream" (in Cheetospeak) newspapers and TV networks heavily beef up security.
God I hope and pray that we don't have any more violence!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on January 09, 2021, 05:44:05 AM
Quote from: T. D. on January 08, 2021, 06:07:12 PM
For all the jokes and so forth, I believe we're in for some scary times.
I'll be shocked if there aren't armed assaults on a number of State capitols, and wouldn't be surprised to see more Oklahoma City style bombings of Federal buildings. I almost typed Nashville in the last sentence; that seems to have been 5G- rather than political-related, so I'll add that corporate targets are possible. I hope that  various "lamestream" (in Cheetospeak) newspapers and TV networks heavily beef up security.

Speaking of "armed assaults" I think it is very fortunate that Washington DC doesn't permit "open carry" as do various states.  In the first instant I think many Trumpites didn't bring guns being aware that Washington police could and probably would immediately arrest them if they were carrying guns.  Things could have been much, much worse of any number of rioters had had guns.

As it was there were at least a couple of arrests relating to guns and other weapons.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 09, 2021, 05:44:54 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 08, 2021, 11:58:11 PM
Let's hope and pray he has a lot of golfing to do.

January 6 could indeed be the definitive starting point of a nativist terrorist movement; however, let's not kid ourselves. These people were busy for a much longer time, such as the bunch of dead-enders who were figuring out how to kill Gretchen Whitttmer on her doorstep.

What needs to be done first, is put every single one of these looters and lawbreakers behind bars for a long time. That horned guy is a hero, insouciantly posing for pictured as if he's totally invulnerable to the law. That illusion needs to be broken.

News, too, is that electronic devices have been stolen during the Capitol coup, making the entire national security system vulnerable.

[Emphasis added] Good luck with that.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-08/west-virginia-lawmaker-derrick-evans-charged-over-capitol-riot
...
The charges against Evans and Barnett are among more than 50 cases the Justice Department has brought against members of the pro-Trump mob that laid siege to the Capitol on Wednesday, smashing windows and sending lawmakers fleeing for safety.

The riot has triggered an expansive national investigation led by an assortment of agencies including the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Capitol Police, the U.S. Marshals, the Metropolitan Police Department in
Washington, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and the U.S. attorney's office in Washington.

At a news conference on Friday, U.S. officials said hundreds of federal law-enforcement agents across three command centers were working on the investigation, scouring video footage and social media posts to identify the perpetrators. All 56 field offices of the FBI are involved.

"The department will spare no resources in our efforts to hold all of these people accountable," prosecutor Ken Kohl said.

President Donald Trump issued an executive order in June saying it was the policy of the U.S. to prosecute anyone who vandalizes federal property to the maximum extent -- with up to 10 years in prison. But there is no indication the rioters will be charged in accordance with the order, John Banzhaf, a professor of law at George Washington University, said in an emailed statement.

"It appears that most of the rioting insurrectionists will face only minor charges, and may well pay only a small fine without spending any time in prison for their crimes," Banzhaf said.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 09, 2021, 05:45:38 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 08, 2021, 11:58:11 PM
Let's hope and pray he has a lot of golfing to do.

January 6 could indeed be the definitive starting point of a nativist terrorist movement; however, let's not kid ourselves. These people were busy for a much longer time, such as the bunch of dead-enders who were figuring out how to kill Gretchen Whitttmer on her doorstep.

What needs to be done first, is put every single one of these looters and lawbreakers behind bars for a long time. That horned guy is a hero, insouciantly posing for pictured as if he's totally invulnerable to the law. That illusion needs to be broken.

News, too, is that electronic devices have been stolen during the Capitol coup, making the entire national security system vulnerable.
Yes, I've heard that some laptops were stolen.  >:(  :(
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 09, 2021, 07:11:59 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/09/pro-trump-dark-money-groups-organized-the-rally-that-led-to-deadly-capitol-hill-riot.html

Also from CNBC live update:

The U.S. Defense Department called Wednesday's pro-Trump riots "first amendment protests" in an official memorandum outlining the D.C. National Guard's response that day.

The memo was issued by the office of the acting Defense secretary. The president fired Defense Secretary Mark Esper in November and replaced him with Christopher Miller, former director of the National Counterterrorism Center.

The police response to the mob of armed rioters who stormed the Capitol has been criticized as lenient, especially in comparison to police response to nonviolent 2018 climate change protests at the Capitol, as well as nationwide protests following the killing of George Floyd in May.

Some former U.S. national security officials have also questioned federal law enforcement's lack of preparedness to prevent the Capitol siege.

Five people died in the mob attack on Congress, including a police officer. CNBC has reached out to the Defense Department for comment.

— Emma Newburger




Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 09, 2021, 08:25:44 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 08, 2021, 11:50:36 PM
These people should be disbarred. You practise law, you vow to uphold the law.

Yes. Accountability is even for lawyers.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on January 09, 2021, 08:29:28 AM
Interesting events.

There is increased attention to what extent that the march and intrusion into the Capitol was pre-meditated, and how much #45 and members of his entourage and allies were aware and part of it.

At least some of the protagonists seem to have planned to take hostages, and Pence, who had fled, was threatened with mob shouts of lynching him. There were many people with military and militia background in the mob, at least one of the first of them brought a number of handcuff strips, and found weapon deposits in the area included guns, napalm, knives and primitive bombs. Some of the participants seem to have had a clear plan for their moves, also inside the building, and they sought up specific offices and assembly rooms.

It is generally considered fortunate, that the exhibited boxes with the recent votes were saved, in the last moments.

One wonders however, why the assault stopped, and what would have happened, if such plans had been carried through. But the congress members had succeeded in fleeing.

Oncoming FBI investigations, depending on its later mandate, are likely to take a year or more, but some leads that have already been drawn attention to by journalists, besides the identifying and pro-#45 backgrounds of many of the protagonists, are:

- Analyzing #45's speech, he seems to have further knowledge on the march he promotes, and expectations of the participation of militants, possibly even military and police forces, and the use of some kind of force besides just demonstrating, etc. His wordings are militant, and go beyond traditional political discourse, in violent imagery.
https://mobile.twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1347908845281095680

((Abramson however suggests that #45 decided not to join the march in the last moments. Others have suggested that advisers talked him from it. Back in the Mueller report days, Abramson also thought that the report would be more categorically critical and immediately damaging to #45, than it was the case, when it was being worked upon and released))

- the course of events suggests some ongoing communication between the protagonists and #45 entourage.
Including: 1. Trump knows Pence will uphold his constitutional duties, but Trump does not tell crowd; 2. Trump says: Let's see what Pence does; 3. After mob enters Capitol, Trump tweets that Pence has betrayed him and them.

- this may be the self-promoting (as he sees it) exaggerations of an extremist, but one of the more important pro#45 figures, Ali Alexander or Ali Akbar, has briefly mentioned himself suggesting and planning the march together with three GOP senators since December - there is other evidence, that this could be true. The senators this person names are Brooks, Biggs and Gosar.
https://mobile.twitter.com/jason_paladino/status/1347602470365765639
https://mobile.twitter.com/jason_paladino/status/1347647000922230784
https://mobile.twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1347893614832209920
https://mobile.twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1347892264077561861

- GOP members seem divided, but a lot of them want to downplay or delay any legal proceedings, regarding the 25th amendment or an impeachment. Colin Powell has suggested that #45 just realizes, that he must resign
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-senoBaqyE

- Finally, there's the option of #45 trying to pardon himself, besides his family and allies. Nobody should feel surprised, if that will unfold.



Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on January 09, 2021, 08:47:35 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on January 09, 2021, 08:29:28 AM

- this may be the self-promoting (as he sees it) exaggerations of an extremist, but one of the more important pro#45 figures, Ali Alexander or Ali Akbar, has briefly mentioned himself suggesting and planning the march together with three GOP senators since December - there is other evidence, that this could be true. The senators this person names are Brooks, Biggs and Gosar.


Brooks was part of the insurrection incitement, occupying a podium next to Trump's and Giuliani's at the pre-insurrection pep rally. Giuliani, who called for "trial by combat" during this event, was clearly advocating violence and should be charged with inciting insurrection.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 09, 2021, 08:51:15 AM
There is really not a ghost of a chance that Trump would have marched along with the crazies to the Capitol.

Did you see a golf cart parked near the podium? I don't think so.

It would have been too dangerous. Imagine a hundred drunken guys asking how Stormy Daniels really is in the sack...

He hates these people, and just uses them as ATM for his grifting, and as cannon fodder for his ghoulish power fantasies.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on January 09, 2021, 09:13:50 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 09, 2021, 08:51:15 AM
There is really not a ghost of a chance that Trump would have marched along with the crazies to the Capitol.

Did you see a golf cart parked near the podium? I don't think so.

It would have been too dangerous. Imagine a hundred drunken guys asking how Stormy Daniels really is in the sack...

He hates these people, and just uses them as ATM for his grifting, and as cannon fodder for his ghoulish power fantasies.

You have a point. In the speech however he did say "Now it is up to Congress to confront this egregious assault on our democracy," "And after this, we're going to walk down — and I'll be there with you — we're going to walk down ... to the Capitol and we're going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women.", as though he would.

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-promised-join-capitol-march-but-slipped-away-by-car-2021-1?r=US&IR=T (incl. video clip)

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 09, 2021, 09:22:43 AM
Bunker Boy
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 09, 2021, 09:38:02 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on January 09, 2021, 09:13:50 AM
as though he would.

You forget that everything he says is a lie.

Everything.

Both the White House and the Trump Hotel across Penn Ave were hermetically sealed, heavily guarded, while the Capitol was underprotected, and remained so for hours as Trump's guys were at it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 09, 2021, 04:04:08 PM
just saw someone refer to OANN as ONAN

bravo
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on January 09, 2021, 06:51:17 PM
Quote from: Herman on January 08, 2021, 03:51:53 AM
The best course of action is prosecuting the hell out of everyone who entered the Capitol illegally.
That would be good.
I like how consistent your enthusiasm for prosecuting people doing bad stuff is with when the riots were going from people on the left for months nationwide, like when they were trying to burn down the Portland courthouse for days, and illegally sectioning part of Seattle to make the CHAZ.
That's really good that you can see doing dumb illegal stuff should be dealt with, regardless of political ideology. Being impartial and having higher principles is a good character trait.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BWV 1080 on January 09, 2021, 07:32:02 PM
We have never before had a sitting president try to subvert the peaceful transfer of power - if this is not treason - i.e. a betrayal of the most important principle this country was founded on, then what is?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on January 09, 2021, 07:35:17 PM
Quote from: greg on January 09, 2021, 06:51:17 PM
That would be good.
I like how consistent your enthusiasm for prosecuting people doing bad stuff is with when the riots were going from people on the left for months nationwide, like when they were trying to burn down the Portland courthouse for days, and illegally sectioning part of Seattle to make the CHAZ.
That's really good that you can see doing dumb illegal stuff should be dealt with, regardless of political ideology. Being impartial and having higher principles is a good character trait.

Did someone here suggest that protesters who committed crimes shouldn't be arrested and prosecuted? I don't remember anyone doing that. The obvious difference in the two situations is that the BLM protests were overwhelmingly peaceful and for the sake of important societal interests. And, in case you hadn't heard, a few of the most notorious instances of lawlessness and property damage were caused by counter protestors, as in the famous "umbrella man" affair. The insurgents at the capital killed people and entered with the intention of taking legislators prisoner and, according to what they were shouting, executing the vice president. So, in short, please file your BS false equivalence in the appropriate place.

And another thing. It would have been entirely appropriate for the capital police to have used every bullet they had on the mob running up the capital steps. That would have saved the millions of dollars it's now costing tax payers to track down, arrest, prosecute, and, eventually, to feed and house the thugs.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on January 09, 2021, 07:43:49 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on January 09, 2021, 07:35:17 PM
Did someone here suggest that protesters who committed crimes shouldn't be arrested and prosecuted?
I remember it being shrugged off like it's not a big deal, "oh, Fox News is just using a fish eye lense to make it look worse than it is," etc. and more.
Many times rioters were let go, no big deal, I guess.

Quote from: BasilValentine on January 09, 2021, 07:35:17 PM
The obvious difference in the two situations is that the BLM protests were overwhelmingly peaceful 
So peaceful that it was at least 19 people that died?
(this isn't directed to you, but...)
Maybe... um... all (political) violence that isn't out of self-defense is bad?  Hmmm possibly in controversial territory there...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on January 09, 2021, 07:47:31 PM
Quote from: greg on January 09, 2021, 06:51:17 PM
That would be good.
I like how consistent your enthusiasm for prosecuting people doing bad stuff is with when the riots were going from people on the left for months nationwide, like when they were trying to burn down the Portland courthouse for days, and illegally sectioning part of Seattle to make the CHAZ.
That's really good that you can see doing dumb illegal stuff should be dealt with, regardless of political ideology. Being impartial and having higher principles is a good character trait.

I disagree with the extreme right and left. Both were wrong for doing what they did, but what makes the riot on the Capitol interesting is Trump did nothing to stop it and in fact was the principal instigator behind all of it, but yet he talked about what thugs these Black Lives Matter protestors were who vandalized property but said nothing to the scum that raided the Capitol. What's even more interesting is how Trump walked back these initial comments after telling them all he loved them the day of the riot.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on January 09, 2021, 07:49:58 PM
Quote from: greg on January 09, 2021, 07:43:49 PM
I remember it being shrugged off like it's not a big deal, "oh, Fox News is just using a fish eye lense to make it look worse than it is," etc. and more.
Many times rioters were let go, no big deal, I guess.
So peaceful that it was at least 19 people that died?
(this isn't directed to you, but...)
Maybe... um... all (political) violence that isn't out of self-defense is bad?  Hmmm possibly in controversial territory there...

Jeez man, unprincipled morons were trying to overthrow the government for the sake of a career criminal and sociopath whose only two viable options for the future are becoming a dictator or spending his remaining years in jail. There is no excuse in the world for even comparing the two situations. They're not remotely in the same category. One was a protest against a pervasive injustice. The other was an insurgency and criminal assault on democracy. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on January 09, 2021, 07:55:49 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on January 09, 2021, 07:47:31 PM
I disagree with the extreme right and left.
Bothsides-ist!

:D

Quote from: Mirror Image on January 09, 2021, 07:47:31 PM
was the principal instigator behind all of it
Did he directly call for it?
I don't follow his Twitter or every one of his speeches so probably missed out on something.



Quote from: BasilValentine on January 09, 2021, 07:49:58 PM
One was a protest against a pervasive injustice.
Right. That's all it was.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 09, 2021, 09:26:44 PM
Trump repeatedly called for "revolution" after his election loss. That word many times...on top of all the other inflammatory shit he said.

And Trump could have diffused the BLM situation at any point by showing just a little bit of empathy and a thin veneer of saying bad cops will be brought to justice. Instead it suited him to continually escalate the anger.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on January 09, 2021, 10:07:38 PM
On TV I saw a lawyer explained why we should impeach Trump after he leaves office.

An ex-president received many perks after he leaves office, including:
$200,000 annual pension.
$1,000,000 annual travel budget
Free medical
Secret Service protection
And other goodies

If he his impeached he would lose these and we tax payers would not have to pay for them.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on January 10, 2021, 12:25:00 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 09, 2021, 09:38:02 AM
You forget that everything he says is a lie.

Everything.

(.....)

Sure, he has a record-breaking CV for it, and his remarks about joining the march were a way of promoting enthusiasm, based on his popularity as the leader. Like his continued - and very generous - use of the word 'we' for creating identity and propagating initiatives generally, including this one.

But some points against this being only lying are:

- saying that he 'will be there with you' also leaves the option open about exactly how and when. The idea was, with or without him, and even at the very least, to build up protest maximum pressure on GOP during the Capitol meeting. He has no respect for political tradition. The option of him turning up later, say if the protests became long-lasting, or took the form of a camp or a siege, was also suggested by those remarks, to the crowd. And exciting it further, of course.

- in a wider sense, 'being there' with them could include just turning up, or even just  driving by, like when he had Covid and drove by, greeting his fans from a closed car window, to much acclaim (by them).

- parts of the speech were from a teleprompter, that is, prepared, and parts of it were improvised. It's uncertain to me what is exactly the case here. But some reports suggest, that earlier, he had hoped - and maybe worked for - participants of policemen and army people in the march. Yet when watching TV footage of it, he was allegedly disappointed with the low-class appearance of the participants (though he liked the 'drama'). This, together with words from advisers, could be factors in his decision-making during the events, including that of not turning up.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 10, 2021, 12:58:43 AM
Quote from: greg on January 09, 2021, 06:51:17 PM
That would be good.
I like how consistent your enthusiasm for prosecuting people doing bad stuff is with when the riots were going from people on the left for months nationwide, like when they were trying to burn down the Portland courthouse for days, and illegally sectioning part of Seattle to make the CHAZ.
That's really good that you can see doing dumb illegal stuff should be dealt with, regardless of political ideology. Being impartial and having higher principles is a good character trait.

I whole-heartedly supported the prosecution of Kyle Rittenhouse, who killed people, while you were busy finding excuses for his shooting people  -  maybe the people he killed had been previously convicted, and in your version of the USA you can kill anyone with a traffic ticket if you're having a bad day.

You really should keep on psychoanalysing yourself on topics noone else contributes to. Much better use of your time.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 10, 2021, 02:40:41 AM
Republicans are writing a letter to Prez-elect Biden asking him to press house Democrats to stop pushing for an impeachment now, since it would be "divisive" en "inflammatory".

This just days after the circus they wanted to make of Jan 6 predictably turned into killing and mayhem.

You gotta love those Republicans....

Impeach and prosecute under the law.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Brahmsian on January 10, 2021, 04:45:40 AM
Amazon, Apple and Google have all disabled and booted Parler.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 10, 2021, 06:24:30 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on January 09, 2021, 07:35:17 PM
Did someone here suggest that protesters who committed crimes shouldn't be arrested and prosecuted?

Not ever, not in the least. Greg cannot argue, so he fantasizes.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 10, 2021, 06:29:05 AM
Republicans largely silent about consequences of deadly attack and Trump's role in inciting it (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/republicans-trump-impeachment-attack/2021/01/09/62e4aea0-5289-11eb-bda4-615aaefd0555_story.html)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 10, 2021, 06:29:35 AM
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-10/trump-plans-defiant-final-week-as-many-democrats-urge-his-ouster

Banned from social media and abandoned by some staff after inciting a riot at the U.S. Capitol, President Donald Trump and a dwindling circle of advisers plan a defiant final week in office, according to people familiar with the matter.

Trump is confident Vice President Mike Pence and members of his cabinet won't attempt to remove him under the 25th Amendment, the people said. Pence is dismissive of the idea of trying to use that authority to drive Trump from office, one person said.

The president and some allies also believe Democrats are overreaching by trying to once again impeach him over Wednesday's mob at the Capitol, and think Senate conviction would be unlikely in any event.

One adviser called Democratic consideration of impeachment a political gift to Trump. Pence hasn't discussed the 25th Amendment beyond privately dismissing the approach as not feasible, according to a person familiar with the matter.

Trump and Pence haven't spoken since Wednesday, though, when the vice president sheltered in place at the Capitol after the building was stormed by Trump supporters. Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma told the Tulsa World newspaper he'd "never seen Pence as angry" as he was after being blasted by Trump for not intervening in the congressional count of Electoral College votes. Trump tweeted that Pence lacked "courage."

Border Wall

Trump plans to run out the clock on his four years in office by highlighting what he believes are his biggest accomplishments, including the barrier his administration built on at least part of the U.S. border with Mexico. A trip to Alamo, Texas, near the border is expected on Tuesday, a White House spokesman said.

Trump is also preparing at least one more round of pardons, and will try a final time to advance his administration's effort to bring Big Tech to heel, the people said, though it isn't clear what he may do.

...

Trump's views on the matter normally wouldn't be much of a secret. But without his Twitter account, @realDonaldTrump, and after a failed, whack-a-mole effort to post from alternative accounts, an eerie silence has descended over the White House.

Inside, Trump has spoken with aides including Mark Meadows, Jared Kushner, Dan Scavino and Kayleigh McEnany, the people said. Outside the building, there's public clamor to remove Trump before his term ends. Some 57% of Americans want the president removed immediately, a Reuters/Ipsos poll published Friday found, while nearly 70% disapprove of Trump's actions leading up to the Capitol riot.

Talk of impeachment or removal from office would make Trump a martyr to his base, one person said. If the vice president led an effort to remove him, it would only reinforce Trump's declarations that a "deep state" of government bureaucrats has long been bent on opposing him, another said.

Base Galvanized
Between the impeachment movement and Trump's censorship by social media, the president and his advisers believe his supporters are galvanized. Trump feels impeachment could have a boomerang effect on Democrats, one person said, while another dismissed it as the latest Democratic witch hunt.

Trump and his team will respond to the Twitter ban during his final week in office by leaning into his fight against what he's called censorship of Republicans by large technology companies. The president has long demanded that Congress revoke Section 230, a liability waiver social media companies depend upon to allow relatively unfettered speech on their platforms. He'll likely amplify that call, though Biden's inauguration on Jan. 20 and Democrats' takeover of the Senate is expected to snuff out prospects for any change to the law for now.

Trump has prepared several executive orders related to Big Tech companies but it's not clear if any will be issued, one person said.

It isn't clear if Trump's team is yet preparing for a Senate impeachment trial. White House counsel Pat Cipollone won't be involved, after leading Trump's defense during his first impeachment a year ago, in part because his job ends with Biden's inauguration, one person familiar with the matter said. Deputy Counsel Pat Philbin also will not not participate, the person said.

Trump's personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani didn't respond to messages seeking comment on Saturday. Neither did Alan Dershowitz, professor emeritus at Harvard Law School, or Jay Sekulow, an outside attorney, who both represented Trump at his first impeachment trial.

The Senate won't reconvene until Jan. 19 and Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said Friday in a memo to colleagues that a trial can't begin before then unless all 100 senators consent to it -- an exceedingly unlikely development, as Trump retains allies among Republicans in the chamber.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 10, 2021, 06:30:08 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on January 10, 2021, 06:24:30 AM
Not ever, not in the least. Greg cannot argue, so he fantasizes.
Glad that they have caught some of the people involved in it; keep at it!

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 10, 2021, 06:34:35 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on January 10, 2021, 06:30:08 AM
Glad that they have caught some of the people involved in it; keep at it!

PD

Hate to be overly cynical, but keep watching carefully for whatever "punishment" is levied on these offenders.
I expect a lot of fines and wrist slaps. Maybe one or two will get token jail time.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 10, 2021, 06:37:38 AM
Quote from: T. D. on January 10, 2021, 06:34:35 AM
Hate to be overly cynical, but keep watching carefully for whatever "punishment" is levied on these offenders.
I expect a lot of fines and wrist slaps. Maybe one or two will get token jail time.
I've also been pondering that (what the punishment/s will be).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 10, 2021, 06:38:15 AM
From CNBC:

Live updates: Trump did not check on Pence during U.S. Capitol siege and they haven't spoken since


President Donald Trump has not called Vice President Mike Pence since the deadly U.S. Capitol riots last week, a source familiar with the matter told NBC News.

As the pro-Trump mob was attacking Congress last Wednesday, Pence had to be evacuated to a secure location in the Capitol. During the attack, Trump did not check on Pence's safety, two sources familiar with matter told NBC News.

Some Pro-Trump rioters were calling for Pence to be hanged. Trump still has not condemned the threats of violence against Pence, but the White House has issued a statement on Saturday.

"We strongly condemn all calls to violence, including those against any member of this administration," White House spokesman Judd Deere said.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 10, 2021, 06:54:07 AM
Quote from: T. D. on January 10, 2021, 06:34:35 AM
Hate to be overly cynical, but keep watching carefully for whatever "punishment" is levied on these offenders.
I expect a lot of fines and wrist slaps. Maybe one or two will get token jail time.

Is it even possible that Trump would pardon them as a final "fuck you"?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on January 10, 2021, 06:56:52 AM
Quote from: T. D. on January 10, 2021, 06:38:15 AM
From CNBC:

Live updates: Trump did not check on Pence during U.S. Capitol siege and they haven't spoken since


President Donald Trump has not called Vice President Mike Pence since the deadly U.S. Capitol riots last week, a source familiar with the matter told NBC News.

As the pro-Trump mob was attacking Congress last Wednesday, Pence had to be evacuated to a secure location in the Capitol. During the attack, Trump did not check on Pence's safety, two sources familiar with matter told NBC News.

Some Pro-Trump rioters were calling for Pence to be hanged. Trump still has not condemned the threats of violence against Pence, but the White House has issued a statement on Saturday.

"We strongly condemn all calls to violence, including those against any member of this administration," White House spokesman Judd Deere said.

Of course, Trump wasn't going to bother checking in on Pence. He probably feels, especially now, that Pence is one reason he's not going in for a second-term. As much as I dislike the Republican ideology, Pence seemed like a decent person or as decent as a Republican can be. :P I liked how he stuck it to Trump by capping off the Biden victory and refusing to pay lip-service to a man who has done nothing but destroy our democracy piece by piece.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 10, 2021, 07:11:42 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on January 10, 2021, 06:54:07 AM
Is it even possible that Trump would pardon them as a final "fuck you"?

I could try to analyze that "six ways from Sunday", but truth is that I have no f**g idea. I unfortunately have extensive experience with crazy people (mentally ill relatives), and hypothetical analysis is useless if the subject doesn't follow your conventions of logic.

Cheeto Mussolini (extremely grudgingly) made statements that the violators should be punished, but what does that mean?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 10, 2021, 07:28:59 AM
It means nothing.

The only reason why I doubt Trump will pardon these looters etc is that they're just little people.

He doesn't care about them. There's suckers born every day.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 10, 2021, 07:31:43 AM
Well said.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 10, 2021, 07:55:10 AM
Kick-ass NYT article by a historian of fascism.
[I read Arendt's Origins of Totalitarianism in 2015.]

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/09/magazine/trump-coup.html

Post-truth is pre-fascism, and Trump has been our post-truth president. When we give up on truth, we concede power to those with the wealth and charisma to create spectacle in its place. Without agreement about some basic facts, citizens cannot form the civil society that would allow them to defend themselves. If we lose the institutions that produce facts that are pertinent to us, then we tend to wallow in attractive abstractions and fictions. Truth defends itself particularly poorly when there is not very much of it around, and the era of Trump — like the era of Vladimir Putin in Russia — is one of the decline of local news. Social media is no substitute: It supercharges the mental habits by which we seek emotional stimulation and comfort, which means losing the distinction between what feels true and what actually is true.

Post-truth wears away the rule of law and invites a regime of myth. These last four years, scholars have discussed the legitimacy and value of invoking fascism in reference to Trumpian propaganda. One comfortable position has been to label any such effort as a direct comparison and then to treat such comparisons as taboo. More productively, the philosopher Jason Stanley has treated fascism as a phenomenon, as a series of patterns that can be observed not only in interwar Europe but beyond it.

My own view is that greater knowledge of the past, fascist or otherwise, allows us to notice and conceptualize elements of the present that we might otherwise disregard and to think more broadly about future possibilities. It was clear to me in October that Trump's behavior presaged a coup, and I said so in print; this is not because the present repeats the past, but because the past enlightens the present.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 10, 2021, 08:09:20 AM

     Trump can't lawfully be denied access to the nuclear codes while he is President. It would be divisive to do something about that.

     The US flag at the Capitol is at half staff honoring the slain police officer. The WH flag is not. The officer was on the wrong side.

     (https://cdn.substack.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Fb649da1c-1216-4d44-8d18-c081dee594d9_5253x3351.jpeg)

     The rope isn't long enough to break a Vice Presidential neck.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Christabel on January 10, 2021, 08:11:53 AM
Quote from: drogulus on January 10, 2021, 08:09:20 AM
     Trump can't lawfully be denied access to the nuclear codes while he is President. It would be divisive to do something about that.

     The US flag at the Capitol is at half staff honoring the slain police officer. The WH flag is not. The officer was on the wrong side.

     (https://cdn.substack.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Fb649da1c-1216-4d44-8d18-c081dee594d9_5253x3351.jpeg)

     The rope isn't long enough to break a Vice Presidential neck.

You were for violence with BLM (shh, I heard you say, not a word) and now you're for your own special kind of violence via the noose.  You've got the politics you deserve and we in other countries enjoy that rich irony.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 10, 2021, 08:15:47 AM
Quote from: T. D. on January 10, 2021, 07:11:42 AM
Cheeto Mussolini (extremely grudgingly) made statements that the violators should be punished, but what does that mean?

I've heard this aptly dismissed as a "Disney animatronic speech."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 10, 2021, 08:26:56 AM

     Trumpists wouldn't be so churlish as to deny Trump credit for inspiring the insurrection. They recognize he is their leader and that the hostage video he released claiming he opposed violence macht nichts.

Quote from: Christabel on January 10, 2021, 08:11:53 AM
You were for violence with BLM (shh, I heard you say, not a word) and now you're for your own special kind of violence via the noose.  You've got the politics you deserve and we in other countries enjoy that rich irony.

     I support BLM protest, but I think that violence in a good cause is still violence and should be punished by the law.

     I don't support the Trumpist mob that proclaimed they wanted to hang Pence and built that scaffold.

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 10, 2021, 08:29:27 AM
Quote from: drogulus on January 10, 2021, 08:26:56 AM
     Trumpists wouldn't be so churlish as to deny Trump credit for inspiring the insurrection. They recognize he is their leader and that the hostage video he released claiming he opposed violence macht nichts.

     I support BLM protest, but I think that violence in a good cause is still violence and should be punished by the law.

     I don't support the Trumpist mob that proclaimed they wanted to hang Pence and built that scaffold.
One doesn't expect a troll to have any regard, let alone use for, the facts.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 10, 2021, 09:20:08 AM
Arnold Schwarzenegger (!) posted an eloquent video on Twitter:

https://twitter.com/i/status/1348249481284874240

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 10, 2021, 09:27:38 AM
     Capitol siege was planned online. Trump supporters now planning the next one. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/01/09/trump-twitter-protests/)

The renewed calls to action in recent days have bristled with violent talk and vows to bring guns to Washington in defiance of the city's strict weapons laws. A new analysis of such posts by Alethea Group, an organization combating disinformation that draws its name from the Greek word for "truth," found abundant evidence of threatening plans on a range of platforms large and small.

The aggressive and often hateful chatter has appeared on both mainstream sites such as Twitter and Facebook and niche conservative sites such as TheDonald.win and Parler. The specified locations include the U.S. Capitol and the Mall in Washington, the Utah Capitol in Salt Lake City, and locations in Pittsburgh and Columbus, Ohio. Some events, including an "Armed March on All State Capitals," include localized events in all 50 states.

"REFUSE TO BE SILENCED," said one online post cited by Alethea Group, calling for an "ARMED MARCH ON CAPITOL HILL & ALL STATE CAPITOLS" for Jan. 17, the last Sunday of Trump's polarizing presidency. Another post called for action at "DC & All State Capitols" and was signed by "common folk who are tired of being tread upon" declares: "We were warned!"


Quote from: T. D. on January 10, 2021, 09:20:08 AM
Arnold Schwarzenegger (!) posted an eloquent video on Twitter:

https://twitter.com/i/status/1348249481284874240



     What does Arnold know about Nazis? He's an immigrant from Austria.

     I'd like to get a straight answer to why genuine "OK to call them" fascists and neo-Nazis support Trump. Why is Trump "one of us" for them but not "one of them" for the rest of us?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on January 10, 2021, 09:36:17 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 10, 2021, 12:58:43 AM
I whole-heartedly supported the prosecution of Kyle Rittenhouse, who killed people, while you were busy finding excuses for his shooting people  -  maybe the people he killed had been previously convicted, and in your version of the USA you can kill anyone with a traffic ticket if you're having a bad day.
Lol, nice misrepresentation of everything.
Self-defense is not making up excuses. I was always against him going out there and defending businesses, that should always be handled by the cops.
But if someone has a gun and someone else is chasing that person, trying to attack them, they have a right to self-defense- doesn't matter who is carrying the gun, they can be Antifa, right-wing people, doesn't matter.

That's the difference- I'm able to think with nuance because I actually put moral values higher than left/right team sports. But your type of thinking is putting team sports above moral values, while pretending that is higher moral values.

The point of my original post was that it's funny how much selective outrage there is-
extreme left-wing people doing something very bad: "oh, but it's mostly peaceful protests, nothing to see here"
extreme right-wing people doing something very bad: "lock them all up!"

You can get lost in the reasons and justifications, but at the end of the day, that's the basic idea, and all that really matters for that observation.

I can throw around the word "tribalism"  some more, but it will be denied, of course :P ;D

Quote from: Herman on January 10, 2021, 12:58:43 AM
You really should keep on psychoanalysing yourself on topics noone else contributes to. Much better use of your time.
Maybe you should give it a shot since the lack of self-awareness and questioning your own beliefs is obvious.


Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 10, 2021, 09:42:10 AM
Unbelievable. Kid is at it again.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 10, 2021, 09:43:29 AM
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-10/best-outcome-is-for-trump-to-resign-gop-senator-toomey-says

By Ros Krasny
January 10, 2021, 9:18 AM EST Updated on January 10, 2021, 1:28 PM EST
Toomey calls resignation 'best thing' instead of impeachment
Lawmakers debate various censures on Trump after Capitol riot

A former Republican ally of Donald Trump said the president "spiraled down into a kind of madness" after losing the election, and that the best option for the U.S. is for him "to resign and go away as soon as possible."

"It does not look as though there is the will or the consensus to exercise the 25th Amendment option. And I don't think there's time to do an impeachment," Senator Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania said on NBC's "Meet the Press." "The best thing would be a resignation."

Toomey said Trump, through his "outrageous behavior in the post-election period," culminating in his role in Wednesday's violent assault on the U.S. Capitol, isn't a viable candidate for office "ever again."



Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 10, 2021, 09:43:47 AM
We've never heard much about Pence's sense of humor (other than calling his wife 'mother'), but it would be a great prank if Trump was persuaded to resign and then Pence would refuse to pardon him.

That would be a hoot.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 10, 2021, 10:15:25 AM
Just ran across this interesting article (will need to revisit it later):

https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/10/politics/james-clyburn-impeachment-senate-trial-biden-cnntv/index.html

House may wail until after Biden's first 100 days to send impeachment articles to Senate.

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 10, 2021, 10:22:16 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 10, 2021, 07:28:59 AM
It means nothing.

The only reason why I doubt Trump will pardon these looters etc is that they're just little people.

He doesn't care about them. There's suckers born every day.

https://news.yahoo.com/trump-more-upset-capitol-mob-161414849.html

As a mob of his supporters stormed the US Capitol on Wednesday, Donald Trump was reportedly unconcerned about the destruction or insurrection taking place but instead how the violent extremists appeared low-class.
...
Mr Trump was apparently turned off by the chaotic scene, although not due to the assault on the US government but according to New York Magazine, because his supporters looked %u201Clow-class%u201D.

'He doesn't like low class things,' an anonymous White House source told the magazine.


Other reports indicated the president's disapproval of his supporters' appearances while attacking the Capitol, rather than focusing on how to end the disorder.

The Washington Post cited sources who said Mr Trump was more upset about how the mob looked 'low-class' than how it was disrupting the work of government. A close adviser to the president told the newspaper Mr Trump was 'bemused' by the attacks.


Also, per CNBC:

WASHINGTON President Donald Trump has not ordered flags to fly at half-staff on federal buildings to honor the police officer who was killed in the U.S. Capitol riot sparked by the president's supporters, according to The New York Times.

Trump has not reached out to the family of U.S. Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick, according to the report. Vice President Mike Pence called the family to offer his condolences.



Whoa, hold the presses! How touching, Cheeto finally lowered the flag.

White House lowers flag to half-staff
WASHINGTON  The flag atop the White House was lowered to half-staff on Sunday afternoon, in an apparent effort to honor the slain police officer who died after the president's supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol.

It was not immediately clear why the White House moved to lower the flag on Sunday. On Friday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi directed the lowering of the flag at the U.S. Capitol.

The New York Times had previously reported that Trump had not given the order to lower the flag and had also not reached out to the family of U.S. Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick. Vice President Mike Pence called the family to offer his condolences.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 10, 2021, 11:00:55 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on January 10, 2021, 10:15:25 AM
Just ran across this interesting article (will need to revisit it later):

https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/10/politics/james-clyburn-impeachment-senate-trial-biden-cnntv/index.html

House may wail until after Biden's first 100 days to send impeachment articles to Senate.

PD

As a censure;  I think this good.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on January 10, 2021, 12:00:28 PM
Quote from: Herman on January 10, 2021, 09:42:10 AM
Unbelievable. Kid is at it again.
I would like you to know that if you were somewhere in possession of a gun, and cameras recorded several people (let's just say they were right-wingers, doesn't matter), running after you trying to attack you, and you shot them, I'd be in full support of your right to self-defense. No questions.

That is all.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 10, 2021, 12:28:05 PM
Like I said. Kid is at it again.

Kyle Rittenhouse was not pursued; he drove all day to get to the place where he could shoot people.

Various people have told you this for days when you first had your crush on Rittenhouse for shooting people you don't identify with. You didn't get it then, and obviously you haven't learned anything in the interval.

Of course I do not have a gun. It's a well-established fact (probably totally new to you) that people with guns have a better chance of getting shot than unarmed people.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on January 10, 2021, 01:40:34 PM
Quote from: Herman on January 10, 2021, 12:28:05 PM
Like I said. Kid is at it again.

Kyle Rittenhouse was not pursued; he drove all day to get to the place where he could shoot people.

Various people have told you this for days when you first had your crush on Rittenhouse for shooting people you don't identify with. You didn't get it then, and obviously you haven't learned anything in the interval.

Of course I do not have a gun. It's a well-established fact (probably totally new to you) that people with guns have a better chance of getting shot than unarmed people.

Not to mention, that the Kenosha police interacted with Rittenhouse, gave him bottled water, and never bothered to check if he was licensed to carry arms. He wasn't. Moreover, against long-standing policy, the Kenosha police actively encouraged the participation of white supremacist groups in opposing the protesters.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on January 10, 2021, 01:48:36 PM
Quote from: Herman on January 10, 2021, 12:28:05 PM
Kyle Rittenhouse was not pursued; he drove all day to get to the place where he could shoot people.
I think you already watched the camera footage where people were running after him. Yes, he was being pursued.

You're also pretending to read his mind by saying "so he could shoot people." We don't know his intent because we don't know what he was thinking. Unless some new information popped up. But you've been saying that from the beginning, so not sure where you are getting that information from. I haven't heard that he told anyone that he just wanted to shoot people and that's it.

And his original intent doesn't even matter in regards to the point I'm making- I already said I don't support him going there in the first place. What matters is what actually happened, whether it was self-defense or not. And according to what we've seen from the camera footage, it appears to be the case.

If he had fired randomly into a crowd, of course I wouldn't support him. But that's not what happened.


Quote from: Herman on January 10, 2021, 12:28:05 PM
Of course I do not have a gun. It's a well-established fact (probably totally new to you) that people with guns have a better chance of getting shot than unarmed people.
I wouldn't expect you to. I don't have one, either, and have no plans to own one. I'm just talking about a purely hypothetical scenario in order to demonstrate my point.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on January 10, 2021, 01:50:29 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on January 10, 2021, 01:40:34 PM
white supremacist groups in opposing the protesters.
Interesting... where is the information saying they were white supremacists?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 10, 2021, 02:34:12 PM
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-10/trump-lowers-white-house-flag-after-capitol-police-death-in-riot

The White House lowered its U.S. flag to half-staff on Sunday, three days after a police officer died from injuries suffered while fending off supporters of President Donald Trump who stormed the Capitol building.

Trump later issued a proclamation directing that flags be lowered at all embassies, consular offices and U.S. facilities abroad, including military installations and naval vessels.

He called the action "a sign of respect for the service and sacrifice" of Capitol Police officers Brian Sicknick, who died on Thursday, and Howard Liebengood, whose death was announced on Sunday, as well as "all Capitol Police Officers and law enforcement across this great Nation."

Trump had faced calls from lawmakers from both parties to take the step in honor of Sicknick after protesters, egged on by the president, invaded the seat of Congress in Washington. Trump made the decision independently, not because of pressure from advisers, a person familiar with the matter said. [Yeah, right! You expect me to believe that shit?  :laugh: - TD]

President-elect Joe Biden has spoken with Sicknick's brother, a presidential transition official said Sunday. Trump hasn't contacted Sicknick's family to offer condolences, the New York Times earlier quoted an unidentified aide to Vice President Mike Pence as saying.
Earlier Sunday, Representative Nancy Mace, a South Carolina Republican, said in a letter to Trump that Sicknick "laid down his life in protection of our democracy" and asked that the flag atop the White House be lowered to half-staff to match the one over the Capitol dome.

The White House flag was lowered in the early afternoon.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 10, 2021, 03:38:21 PM
This is beautiful

https://www.youtube.com/v/x_P-0I6sAck
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on January 10, 2021, 03:44:54 PM
Quote from: T. D. on January 10, 2021, 02:34:12 PM
Trump hasn't contacted Sicknick's family to offer condolences, the New York Times earlier quoted an unidentified aide to Vice President Mike Pence as saying.
Earlier Sunday, Representative Nancy Mace, a South Carolina Republican, said in a letter to Trump that Sicknick "laid down his life in protection of our democracy" and asked that the flag atop the White House be lowered to half-staff to match the one over the Capitol dome.

The White House flag was lowered in the early afternoon.

Nor should he. Nor should we expect him to. Trump is responsible for Sicknick's death. It would be absurd and indecent for him to contact the officer's family in any way.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on January 10, 2021, 10:24:04 PM
Quote from: drogulus on January 10, 2021, 09:27:38 AM

     What does Arnold know about Nazis? He's an immigrant from Austria.
   

I take it that you have never seen The Sound of Music.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on January 10, 2021, 10:46:58 PM
Seth Abramson has now also been going through the speeches of Donald Trump Jr., Rudy Giuliani, Mo Brooks, and Eric Trump before the march

https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1348373138388766723
https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1348387171930173440
https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1348403083303378944
https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1348417396525182978
https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1348434522472382468

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 11, 2021, 05:12:20 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on January 10, 2021, 10:46:58 PM
Seth Abramson has now also been going through the speeches of Donald Trump Jr., Rudy Giuliani, Mo Brooks, and Eric Trump before the march

https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1348373138388766723
https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1348387171930173440
https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1348403083303378944
https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1348417396525182978
https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1348434522472382468

Thanks.  I read Hannah Arendt's The Origins of Totalitarianism back in 2015 (already disturbed by US political trends) and find his analysis informative.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on January 11, 2021, 05:18:49 AM
Educational, I think - even perhaps a bit of a 'vaccine' in relation to certain political/rhetorical tendencies ...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on January 11, 2021, 05:23:19 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on January 10, 2021, 10:46:58 PM
Seth Abramson has now also been going through the speeches of Donald Trump Jr., Rudy Giuliani, Mo Brooks, and Eric Trump before the march

https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1348373138388766723
https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1348387171930173440
https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1348403083303378944
https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1348417396525182978
https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1348434522472382468
Mo Brooks. Are there going to be any consequences for people like him? Disgusting.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 11, 2021, 05:29:30 AM
One of the things I don't quite get is how a guy like Cruz gets reelected every time.

He's often described as the most hated man in the senate after McConnell, and it's easy to see he's just too self-melodramatic and phoney, and yet a sufficient nr of people pull the lever for him. I know those people are Texans, but still... Why is this man not primaried by a member of the human race?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on January 11, 2021, 05:51:02 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 11, 2021, 05:29:30 AM
One of the things I don't quite get is how a guy like Cruz gets reelected every time.

He's often described as the most hated man in the senate after McConnell, and it's easy to see he's just too self-melodramatic and phoney, and yet a sufficient nr of people pull the lever for him. I know those people are Texans, but still... Why is this man not primaried by a member of the human race?
everything he does seems cynical and desperate and weak. He knows tump lost, too. What a poser. How do people live like that? He's a professional phony.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 11, 2021, 05:51:36 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/11/trump-impeachment-capitol-riots-biden-transition-live-updates.html

President Donald Trump is set to kick off the week by awarding his conservative ally Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, the nation's highest civilian honor, the Medal of Freedom, on Monday.

Later in the week he will bestow the prize on New England Patriots coach Bill Belichick, a White House official told NBC News. The Associated Press reported that Belichick is expected to receive the medal on Thursday.

Belichick has not confirmed he will accept the medal, and there have been some calls for him to refuse to do so. Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., said on CNN earlier in the day that Belichick "should do the right thing and say, 'No, thanks.'"

Trump is handing off the medals in the last full week of his presidency as Democrats in the House of Representatives prepare to move forward with his impeachment.

Jordan, who has supported Trump throughout his presidency, has said he opposes impeachment. He was one of the Republicans to object to certifying President-elect Joe Biden's Electoral College wins last week.


Trump has not been seen in public since speaking to supporters at a rally on Wednesday before they attacked the U.S. Capitol during the formal certification process. He is expected to travel to Alamo, Texas, on Tuesday.

According to the White House, the Medal of Freedom is awarded to those "who have made exceptional contributions to the security or national interests of America, to world peace, or to cultural or other significant public or private endeavors."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on January 11, 2021, 06:06:46 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 11, 2021, 05:29:30 AM
One of the things I don't quite get is how a guy like Cruz gets reelected every time.

He's often described as the most hated man in the senate after McConnell, and it's easy to see he's just too self-melodramatic and phoney, and yet a sufficient nr of people pull the lever for him. I know those people are Texans, but still... Why is this man not primaried by a member of the human race?

Most money. In the US elections 90 % of the time the candidate with most money within a party wins the election. Of course often the candidate with most campaign money is also most corrupt.

Most people don't really follow politics. They work hard to pay the bills and don't have much energy for following politics. Also, people feel all the politicians the same, corrupt and shameless. So, they tend to vote for the well-known candidates if they bother to vote at all.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 11, 2021, 06:09:54 AM
Quote from: milk on January 11, 2021, 05:51:02 AM
everything he does seems cynical and desperate and weak. He knows tump lost, too. What a poser. How do people live like that? He's a professional phony.

I think it's fair to say that among Republican members of the House and Senate the job is purely performative.

Virtually nothing they say is sincere or honest. It's pandering to the nth degree.

What I don't get with Cruz is it's so obvious he's a total phoney, willing to do anything and then some to be a US Senator (it's not like there isn't another way for a Princeton / Harvard Law School graduate to make a living) and still there is a sufficient number of Texans who are willing to vote this lugubrious clown into office, even though he's licking the shoes of the man who insulted his wife and his dad.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 11, 2021, 06:12:09 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 11, 2021, 06:09:54 AM
I think it's fair to say that among Republican members of the House and Senate the job is purely performative.

Virtually nothing they say is sincere or honest. It pandering to the nth degree.

What I don't get with Cruz is it's so obvious he's a total phoney, willing to do anything and then some to be a US Senator (it's not like there isn't another way for a Princeton / Harvard Law School graduate to make a living) and still there is a sufficient number of Texans who are willing to vote this lugubrious clown into office, even though he's licking the shoes of the man who insulted his wife and his dad.

Not just a Senator. He and the odious Hawley (also with high-powered legal background) are seeking (to put it mildly) to be the new flag-bearers of Cheeto Mussolinism, and to run for POTUS.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-11/supreme-court-rejects-trump-bid-to-expedite-election-appeals

The U.S. Supreme Court refused to expedite election appeals filed by President Donald Trump to overturn President-elect Joe Biden's victories in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.

The orders, issued without comment or public dissent, are formalities with Biden is set to be inaugurated on Jan. 20.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 11, 2021, 07:01:00 AM

     Republican AGs group sent robocalls urging protesters to the Capitol. GOP officials now insist they didn't know about it. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/01/11/gop-robocalls-trump-rally-capitol/)

After the attempted insurrection on Wednesday left a police officer and four others dead, several GOP attorneys general have distanced themselves from the robocalls, insisting they didn't know about the campaign. Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall, the chairman of the Rule of Law Defense Fund, the nonprofit that sent out the calls, blamed the group's staffers.

"I was unaware of unauthorized decisions made by RLDF staff with regard to this week's rally," he said in a statement to the Montgomery Advertiser. "It is unacceptable that I was neither consulted about nor informed of those decisions. I have directed an internal review of the matter."


     Repub AGs remain committed to not knowing very much about what they did to support the march on the Capitol.

Despite claims from the attorneys general that the nonprofit played no role in organizing the rally, Documented reported that the website promoting the "March to Save America," rally, which was down as of early Monday morning, showed the Rule of Law Defense Fund among the organizations listed as participants.

Democratic attorneys general also noted that Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who furthered Trump's baseless fraud claims in a failed lawsuit, spoke at the rally and that Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), a former attorney general, led the move to object to President-elect Joe Biden's win.

"Its former chair spoke at the rally that incited the mob," the group's statement said, referring to Paxton. "And former GOP A.G. Josh Hawley led the effort in Congress to undermine the election."


     I wasn't there, it wasn't me, a staffer did something wrong, do it to Julia.......
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 11, 2021, 07:42:06 AM
From MSN's website

Former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund's request for National Guard backup was denied, he says in interview
John Bacon, USA TODAY  1 hr ago


Former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund says he requested that the National Guard be placed on standby in the days before the deadly riot at the U.S. Capitol but that House and Senate security officials turned him down.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/former-capitol-police-chief-steven-sunds-request-for-national-guard-backup-was-denied-he-says-in-interview/ar-BB1cElx3

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 11, 2021, 07:48:15 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 11, 2021, 06:09:54 AM(it's not like there isn't another way for a Princeton / Harvard Law School graduate to make a living)

Aye, but they may just entail good, honest work.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 11, 2021, 09:11:22 AM

     https://www.youtube.com/v/aEGthdTzedk&ab_channel=StoryfulRightsManagement

     "We love you, you're very special"
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 11, 2021, 09:39:07 AM
I can't believe people do these things, however I suspect many of them were drunk and coked-up.

There's some footage with a bunch of guys after the Capitol had been cleared (more or less) and they were just yelling "Traitor, traitor!" at cops standing at some distance. At the top of their lungs, the way small children can totally lose it, because they're totally possessed by one emotion.

Traitor has become a completely empty word, meaning something like, "someone who looks at things different than I". However, if the wrong bunch of guys had managed to corner Pence / Pounds he would have been killed.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 11, 2021, 10:07:54 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 11, 2021, 09:39:07 AM
I can't believe people do these things, however I suspect many of them were drunk and coked-up.

There's some footage with a bunch of guys after the Capitol had been cleared (more or less) and they were just yelling "Traitor, traitor!" at cops standing at some distance. At the top of their lungs, the way small children can totally lose it, because they're totally possessed by one emotion.

Traitor has become a completely empty word, meaning something like, "someone who looks at things different than I". However, if the wrong bunch of guys had managed to corner Pence / Pounds he would have been killed.

     I think Pence would have been marched to the gallows. Without a doubt it was intended for him.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 11, 2021, 10:33:07 AM
From CNBC:

House Democrat tests positive for Covid, suspects she was exposed during Capitol attack

Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman, D-N.J., tested positive for Covid-19 after sheltering with colleagues — some of whom refused to wear face coverings — during the Capitol insurrection last week.

The 75-year-old representative's office said "she believes she was exposed during protective isolation" after Trump supporters stormed the Capitol while Congress counted President-elect Joe Biden's election win. She appears to be the first member of Congress who has attributed a positive test to exposure during the riot.

On Sunday, the attending physician at the Capitol told House members they "may have been exposed to another occupant with coronavirus infection" while they sheltered in place.

A widely circulated video from Wednesday showed several House Republicans, who were not wearing face coverings, laughing when Rep. Lisa Blunt Rochester, D-Del., offered them masks. It is unclear if Watson Coleman was in the same room.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 11, 2021, 11:04:52 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 11, 2021, 09:39:07 AM
Traitor has become a completely empty word, meaning something like, "someone who looks at things different than I".


A usage dating at least to Anne Coulter's "book."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on January 11, 2021, 11:33:06 AM
QuoteFirst, Apple and Google removed the app from their app stores because they said it had not sufficiently policed its users' posts, allowing too many that encouraged violence and crime
So... are we supposed to cheer that Parler is shut down because supposedly the people used it to coordinate the riot?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on January 11, 2021, 11:40:23 AM
Quote from: greg on January 11, 2021, 11:33:06 AM
So... are we supposed to cheer that Parler is shut down because supposedly the people used it to coordinate the riot?

Yes, we should cheer! Huzzah! Muzzle the mother f-----s. It's what one does with rabid animals.

In case you haven't noticed, we're in the middle of an insurrection.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on January 11, 2021, 12:24:06 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on January 11, 2021, 11:40:23 AM
Yes, we should cheer! Huzzah! Muzzle the mother f-----s. It's what one does with rabid animals.

In case you haven't noticed, we're in the middle of an insurrection.
I think that probably it is for the best, temporarily, but I have some concerns about this action.

So you really don't have any other thoughts, at all, about it? None whatsoever?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 11, 2021, 12:37:43 PM
Doubtless you want to claim its a 'freedom of speech" issue.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: North Star on January 11, 2021, 01:25:25 PM
Quote from: greg on January 09, 2021, 06:51:17 PM
That would be good.
I like how consistent your enthusiasm for prosecuting people doing bad stuff is with when the riots were going from people on the left for months nationwide, like when they were trying to burn down the Portland courthouse for days, and illegally sectioning part of Seattle to make the CHAZ.
That's really good that you can see doing dumb illegal stuff should be dealt with, regardless of political ideology. Being impartial and having higher principles is a good character trait.
Quote from: greg on January 09, 2021, 07:43:49 PM
I remember it being shrugged off like it's not a big deal, "oh, Fox News is just using a fish eye lense to make it look worse than it is," etc. and more.
Many times rioters were let go, no big deal, I guess.
So peaceful that it was at least 19 people that died?
(this isn't directed to you, but...)
Maybe... um... all (political) violence that isn't out of self-defense is bad?  Hmmm possibly in controversial territory there...
Quote from: greg on January 10, 2021, 09:36:17 AM
Lol, nice misrepresentation of everything.
Self-defense is not making up excuses. I was always against him going out there and defending businesses, that should always be handled by the cops.
But if someone has a gun and someone else is chasing that person, trying to attack them, they have a right to self-defense- doesn't matter who is carrying the gun, they can be Antifa, right-wing people, doesn't matter.

That's the difference- I'm able to think with nuance because I actually put moral values higher than left/right team sports. But your type of thinking is putting team sports above moral values, while pretending that is higher moral values.

The point of my original post was that it's funny how much selective outrage there is-
extreme left-wing people doing something very bad: "oh, but it's mostly peaceful protests, nothing to see here"
extreme right-wing people doing something very bad: "lock them all up!"

You can get lost in the reasons and justifications, but at the end of the day, that's the basic idea, and all that really matters for that observation.

I can throw around the word "tribalism"  some more, but it will be denied, of course :P ;D
Maybe you should give it a shot since the lack of self-awareness and questioning your own beliefs is obvious.
Quote from: greg on January 10, 2021, 12:00:28 PM
I would like you to know that if you were somewhere in possession of a gun, and cameras recorded several people (let's just say they were right-wingers, doesn't matter), running after you trying to attack you, and you shot them, I'd be in full support of your right to self-defense. No questions.

That is all.
Quote from: greg on January 10, 2021, 01:50:29 PM
Interesting... where is the information saying they were white supremacists?
Quote from: greg on January 11, 2021, 11:33:06 AM
So... are we supposed to cheer that Parler is shut down because supposedly the people used it to coordinate the riot?
I don't see much nuance or moral values in all the whataboutism attempting to justify the coup attempt by Trump, comparing it to the violence surrounding the BLM protests (without any actual statistics about how much of the violence and murders was actually committed by Antifa, BLM protesters, black people, white people, white supremacists, police, counter-protesters, or teenagers traveling to different states with semiautomatic rifles), let alone consideration of the fact that those protests were about the police killing black people for no reason and with no consequences, as opposed to trying to stage a coup because you didn't get as many votes as the other guy. And you claim that you're above 'team sports' and tribalism.  ::)

Also, companies have a right to not offer a platform for other companies or people who don't respect their terms of service. It's not a civil rights issue.


(https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/free_speech.png) (https://xkcd.com/1357/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 11, 2021, 01:53:12 PM
On CNN currently (and mentioned earlier on air):  "The FBI had received information that all 50 state capitols, plus the US capitol in Washington, are being targeting in the days leading up to Biden's inauguration."

https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/11/politics/fbi-bulletin-armed-protests-state-us-capitol/index.html

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on January 11, 2021, 01:57:18 PM
Quote from: North Star on January 11, 2021, 01:25:25 PM
I don't see much nuance or moral values in all the whataboutism attempting to justify the coup attempt by Trump, comparing it to the violence surrounding the BLM protests (without any actual statistics about how much of the violence and murders was actually committed by Antifa, BLM protesters, black people, white people, white supremacists, police, counter-protesters, or teenagers traveling to different states with semiautomatic rifles), let alone consideration of the fact that those protests were about the police killing black people for no reason and with no consequences, as opposed to trying to stage a coup because you didn't get as many votes as the other guy. And you claim that you're above 'team sports' and tribalism.  ::)

Also, companies have a right to not offer a platform for other companies or people who don't respect their terms of service. It's not a civil rights issue.


(https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/free_speech.png) (https://xkcd.com/1357/)
You're not getting my point at all and redefining the issues in your own terms, so I'm not going to respond because that's just not a good start to any discussion.



Quote from: SimonNZ on January 11, 2021, 12:37:43 PM
Doubtless you want to claim its a 'freedom of speech" issue.
It is. This app was supposed to be for conservatives that were already being censored on big platforms.

But the problem is these people are making things worse by giving tech companies reasons to ban them- free speech ends at incitement to violence. So they are shooting themselves in the foot.

Do you have a problem with free speech if the opinion differs from yours? Or are you pro free speech (as long as it doesn't cause violence)?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 11, 2021, 02:12:46 PM
Acting Homeland Security chief Chad Wolf resigns.  Another resignation.  Who the heck there is left to look out for the US?!  ??? :( 

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 11, 2021, 02:16:22 PM
Quote from: greg on January 11, 2021, 01:57:18 PM

It is. This app was supposed to be for conservatives that were already being censored on big platforms.

But the problem is these people are making things worse by giving tech companies reasons to ban them- free speech ends at incitement to violence. So they are shooting themselves in the foot.

Do you have a problem with free speech if the opinion differs from yours? Or are you pro free speech (as long as it doesn't cause violence)?


They weren't kicked off the big platforms because they were merely "conservatives", it was because they were toxic or dangerous or both.

As I understand it Apple gave them 24 hours to come up with a better model of moderating but they couldn't or wouldn't do it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on January 11, 2021, 02:25:06 PM
Quote from: North Star on January 11, 2021, 01:25:25 PM
I don't see much nuance or moral values in all the whataboutism attempting to justify the coup attempt by Trump, comparing it to the violence surrounding the BLM protests (without any actual statistics about how much of the violence and murders was actually committed by Antifa, BLM protesters, black people, white people, white supremacists, police, counter-protesters, or teenagers traveling to different states with semiautomatic rifles), let alone consideration of the fact that those protests were about the police killing black people for no reason and with no consequences, as opposed to trying to stage a coup because you didn't get as many votes as the other guy. And you claim that you're above 'team sports' and tribalism.  ::)

Also, companies have a right to not offer a platform for other companies or people who don't respect their terms of service. It's not a civil rights issue.


(https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/free_speech.png) (https://xkcd.com/1357/)
There's a lot of concepts here but it's not really difficult to hold these views at the same time.
1. Biden didn't incite BLM protests, though he could have criticized some of what happened more.
2. BLM we're mostly protests that got out of hand. In many cases they devolved into insanity.
3. The Capitol insurrection wasn't a protest that got out of hand. It was a deranged mob and a planned coup attempt.
4. We can imagine what would have happened if that mob got ahold of Pence or Pelosi.
5. If security were better, many more people would have died. They're lucky they're in prison instead of in a morgue, where they should be (I'm not wishing they were dead, but things should have worked better: which would mean many would be dead)
6. You can condemn the violence and property destruction during the BLM protests at the same time as (and for different reasons than) the Capitol mayhem.
7. Confederate flags and auschwitz t-shits! These are not merely misguided people, though some of the people in the mob are deeply confused.
8. Trum should be impeached. He has embarrassed the country and weakened American democracy.
9. FB and Twitter have a (1st amendment) right to cancel subscribers BUT it is worrying how much control a few companies have over the "public" forum. Canceling people without a process is troubling. Big SM companies should probably be regulated.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on January 11, 2021, 02:28:31 PM
Quote from: greg on January 11, 2021, 12:24:06 PM
I think that probably it is for the best, temporarily, but I have some concerns about this action.

So you really don't have any other thoughts, at all, about it? None whatsoever?

I do have other thoughts. What we're talking about here is cutting the enemy's lines of communication, disrupting command and control. The other actions are obvious. Find them. Dox them. Round them up. Make them suffer financially. Put them in cages. Get them out of law enforcement and the military..
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on January 11, 2021, 02:28:48 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on January 11, 2021, 02:16:22 PM
They weren't kicked off the big platforms because they were merely "conservatives", it was because they were toxic or dangerous or both.
Ok, so who gets to define what is "toxic"?

As for the the idea of tribalism, I can clarify a bit more maybe.

Some people here (who are left-leaning) have said they don't support violence on the left or right. They aren't tribalists.

While others largely dismiss, ignore, or say the violence on one side is "for a good cause", while enthusiastically speaking out against violence from the other side. And then get into petty comparison games about which is worse, when in reality they are both just very bad. Those are tribalists.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on January 11, 2021, 02:33:45 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on January 11, 2021, 02:28:31 PM
I do have other thoughts. What we're talking about here is cutting the enemy's lines of communication, disrupting command and control. The other actions are obvious. Dox them. Expose them. Round them up. Make them suffer financially. Put them in cages. Get them out of law enforcement and the military..
Well, it really is that simple and there's no implications, nothing that could backfire down the road? Nothing? It'll all work out?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on January 11, 2021, 02:36:30 PM
Quote from: greg on January 11, 2021, 02:28:48 PM
Ok, so who gets to define what is "toxic"?

As for the the idea of tribalism, I can clarify a bit more maybe.

Some people here (who are left-leaning) have said they don't support violence on the left or right. They aren't tribalists.

While others largely dismiss, ignore, or say the violence on one side is "for a good cause", while enthusiastically speaking out against violence from the other side. And then get into petty comparison games about which is worse, when in reality they are both just very bad. Those are tribalists.
Both are bad. But Biden didn't do anything that necessarily disqualified him from holding office. Tump disqualified himself back in 2016 by suggesting he might not have accepted the results of that election, and by encouraging violence on several occasions. What happened at the Capitol was shocking but predictable. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 11, 2021, 02:46:02 PM
Quote from: greg on January 11, 2021, 02:28:48 PM

While others largely dismiss, ignore, or say the violence on one side is "for a good cause", while enthusiastically speaking out against violence from the other side. And then get into petty comparison games about which is worse, when in reality they are both just very bad. Those are tribalists.

Absolutely nobody here has done that. You're told that's how lefties think and assume those here would have.

So who's the "tribal" one now, then?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Brahmsian on January 11, 2021, 02:48:47 PM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on January 11, 2021, 01:53:12 PM
On CNN currently (and mentioned earlier on air):  "The FBI had received information that all 50 state capitols, plus the US capitol in Washington, are being targeting in the days leading up to Biden's inauguration."

https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/11/politics/fbi-bulletin-armed-protests-state-us-capitol/index.html

PD

Very scary stuff.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on January 11, 2021, 03:00:50 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on January 11, 2021, 02:46:02 PM
Absolutely nobody here has done that. You're told that's how lefties think and assume those here would have.
Uh, yeah, Herman specifically. And many people were silent while the left was causing destruction during their riots this year. Yet you can see this thread erupt during this recent event (understandably).


Quote from: SimonNZ on January 11, 2021, 02:46:02 PM
So who's the "tribal" one now, then?
Dude, no one is going to get anywhere asking this question. I'm not much of a political person. And I'm practically allergic to being part of any groups.
Main things I am for in regards to politics is freedom of speech and absence of violence. Whoever is for both, I'm probably gonna be cool with that. That's about it.



Also, since the vast majority of people here are on the left, saying anything against the grain is going to be perceived as being far right or something, even if it isn't, so yeah...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 11, 2021, 03:43:25 PM
Quote from: greg on January 11, 2021, 03:00:50 PM
I'm not much of a political person. .

I can only take that to mean "proudly uninformed", which is nothing to be proud of. And it comes after you've unironically boasted about being a highly nuanced thinker.

But its clear you do have a political skew, even if you deny it, even if it doesn't go much beyond a twitter/YT bobblehead low-information-voter targeted spin, even if you're not aware its getting through and getting in.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on January 11, 2021, 03:53:35 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on January 11, 2021, 03:43:25 PM
I can only take that to mean "proudly uninformed", which is nothing to be proud of.
Your words, not mine.

Quote from: SimonNZ on January 11, 2021, 03:43:25 PM
And it comes after you've unironically boasted about being a highly nuanced thinker.
"Boasting"- your perception, not mine.
Thinking isn't the same thing as "being informed." Some people can be addicted to information yet unable to process it.

Quote from: SimonNZ on January 11, 2021, 03:43:25 PM
But its clear you do have a political skew, even if you deny it
Sure, of course. I'm against extremism and authoritarianism,
Just today there were people I saw on youtube supporting the Capitol Hill thing and I was thinking about how stupid and tribalistic they were. If they posted here I'd say the same thing to them.

Question for you: Do you think the Capitol Hill incident was bad? And do you think the riots in 2020 were bad?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 11, 2021, 04:24:40 PM
https://sports.yahoo.com/bill-belichick-turning-down-presidential-medal-of-freedom-from-donald-trump-cites-capitol-attack-004322680.html

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ErfeEl_XUAEYMOt?format=jpg&name=small)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 11, 2021, 04:59:21 PM
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/11/people-will-try-to-kill-us-says-gop-lawmaker-on-going-against-trump.html

Republican Congressman Peter Meijer from Michigan was one of only nine freshmen GOP lawmakers who voted to uphold the Nov. 3 election results. He told CNBC's "The News with Shepard Smith" that his life could now be at risk because of it.

"We realize that was a vote we cast that put our safety at risk and going forward, I am expecting there will likely be more political violence," said Meijer. "So my expectation and the expectation of some folks I'm talking to who are trying to vote our conscience on this, there will be folks that try to kill us, and that's something we have to grapple with every day."

Meijer added that, in turn, that threat of violence has compelled and will continue to intimidate some of his Republican colleagues into voting on the side of the Trump administration. In an op-ed, Meijer wrote that a fellow lawmaker only objected to President-elect Joe Biden's win because they were afraid that President Trump's supporters would come after his or her family.

"That was what weighed on the colleague in mind's conscience (sic), and the last thing that that individual said to me, concern about the safety of that individual's family, if that individual voted to certify the election," Meijer said. "That is where the rhetoric has brought us. That is the degree of fear that's been created."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 11, 2021, 05:05:43 PM
Open ruled out for Trump's Turnberry as Bedminster stripped of 2022 US PGA (https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/jan/11/pga-strips-major-golf-championship-from-donald-trumps-course)

"The R&A has appeared to rule out Turnberry hosting the Open golf championship while it remains in the hands of Donald Trump - with its chief executive warning that they will not return to the Scottish course until they are "convinced that the focus will be on the championship".

The news comes after Trump National in Bedminster was stripped of next year's US PGA Championship with organisers insisting that using the course would be "detrimental" to their brand in the wake of the invasion of the US Capitol.

Last year the R&A said that Turnberry remained "absolutely in the pool of courses" to hold the Open, despite not staging the event since it was purchased by Trump in 2014. However, the R&A chief executive, Martin Slumbers, was much more circumspect on Monday, warning that he saw little chance of the event returning anytime soon – although he did not refer to the US president by name.

"We had no plans to stage any of our championships at Turnberry and will not do so in the foreseeable future," said Slumbers in a statement. "We will not return until we are convinced that the focus will be on the championship, the players and the course itself and we do not believe that is achievable in the current circumstances."[...]
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on January 11, 2021, 06:12:09 PM
Quote from: greg on January 11, 2021, 02:33:45 PM
Well, it really is that simple and there's no implications, nothing that could backfire down the road? Nothing? It'll all work out?

There are no oracles, although, come to think of it, I've been predicting this outcome for years. Hmm. Those steps I listed are forced moves on any trajectory that serves the health of  the republic. We are in the present situation precisely because cowed, craven Repuglicans repeatedly refused to hold criminals accoutable for their criminal acts. Over and over, leading to the assumption of impunity on the part of the criminal in chief. The path is clear and I'm sure we'll sort out the consequences as we go. The GOP has left no other viable choice.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on January 11, 2021, 10:16:21 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on January 11, 2021, 06:12:09 PM
There are no oracles, although, come to think of it, I've been predicting this outcome for years. Hmm. Those steps I listed are forced moves on any trajectory that serves the health of  the republic. We are in the present situation precisely because cowed, craven Repuglicans repeatedly refused to hold criminals accoutable for their criminal acts. Over and over, leading to the assumption of impunity on the part of the criminal in chief. The path is clear and I'm sure we'll sort out the consequences as we go. The GOP has left no other viable choice.
I can definitely envision this kind of thing blowing back the other way when a few people/corporations have total control over the public (I know, it's actually private) square AND we live in a time when a social media mob can destroy anyone's life without due process of any kind. Social media can also make you vanish from that public (ok, private) piazza (there's many a petition to vanish people right now and it's not a logical leap to imagine this being successful). 
I'm not saying Parlor doesn't deserve it. I don't know enough about it to say whether incitement is going on there with abandon. If it is, there has to be consequences. I'm assuming this will play out in court and we will get to see if the action is warranted. I'm not so comfortable with the state of things vis a vis social media. Anyway, I think twitter is 4 years too late when it comes to The Donald. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 12, 2021, 12:55:31 AM
Quote from: greg on January 11, 2021, 03:00:50 PM
Uh, yeah, Herman specifically.


No big deal, but thanks for lying about what I say / think. Complex issues are too hard for you, so you can't be blamed. Best is to encourage you to stay off political threads, esp as you're saying (disingenuously) you're not interested in politics. Your mask of impartiality is transparent to all here. Your preening vanity, too.

I haven't said that it's okay to destroy property for BLMers. I have said that it's to be expected, after significant social injustice, that property gets destroyed and looting occurs, not necessarily by BLM activists, but by opportunists in the bandwagon. This happens virtually every time since time immemorial. In the case of riots in Minneapolis and Portland there is substantial evidence there were rightwing groups destroying property, lighting fires and committing violence. Like for instance your hero Riitenhouse who travelled all day because he wanted to kill some.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mandryka on January 12, 2021, 01:07:43 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ErfKdUJXIAEnhGT?format=jpg&name=medium)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on January 12, 2021, 04:19:21 AM
Quote from: Mandryka on January 12, 2021, 01:07:43 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ErfKdUJXIAEnhGT?format=jpg&name=medium)
I'm guessing Giuliani is checking IN and not out. :laugh: I like how trump is reading about trump.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Brahmsian on January 12, 2021, 04:26:26 AM
Quote from: Mandryka on January 12, 2021, 01:07:43 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ErfKdUJXIAEnhGT?format=jpg&name=medium)

Trump's facial expression reads like:

"Where's the KFC menu?  Does DoorDash deliver here?"
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on January 12, 2021, 04:40:39 AM
Quote from: milk on January 11, 2021, 10:16:21 PM
I can definitely envision this kind of thing blowing back the other way when a few people/corporations have total control over the public (I know, it's actually private) square AND we live in a time when a social media mob can destroy anyone's life without due process of any kind. Social media can also make you vanish from that public (ok, private) piazza (there's many a petition to vanish people right now and it's not a logical leap to imagine this being successful). 
I'm not saying Parlor doesn't deserve it. I don't know enough about it to say whether incitement is going on there with abandon. If it is, there has to be consequences. I'm assuming this will play out in court and we will get to see if the action is warranted. I'm not so comfortable with the state of things vis a vis social media. Anyway, I think twitter is 4 years too late when it comes to The Donald.

I also support anti-trust action against the monster firms. In my view that's a discussion for later. For now they're providing a good way to choke the terrorists
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on January 12, 2021, 07:18:47 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 12, 2021, 12:55:31 AM
Complex issues are too hard for you, so you can't be blamed.
So you wonder why I brought up IQ in the past, or talk about nuance, because you say stuff like this.

And then you say I'm bragging when I refute it. So how is defending one's self bragging and being vain? Guess I'm supposed to just let you say I'm dumb and move on?


Quote from: Herman on January 12, 2021, 12:55:31 AM
Best is to encourage you to stay off political threads
You don't have to respond to me if you don't want to.


Quote from: Herman on January 12, 2021, 12:55:31 AM
Your mask of impartiality is transparent to all here.
No one is 100% impartial. But I try to be as much as possible. You don't, at least based on what I've read from you.


Quote from: Herman on January 12, 2021, 12:55:31 AM
I haven't said that it's okay to destroy property for BLMers.
You are subtly rephrasing the point I'm making into something else. I'm not saying that you are saying "it's OK."

My point is, when all this was happening, your attitude was more like "oh, that's just how it is," while never really speaking out against it.

But when people on the right do something bad now, it's passionate antagonism against them. Which is fine, but where was that months ago?


Quote from: Herman on January 12, 2021, 12:55:31 AM
your hero Riitenhouse
I already made my position clear... why do you keep on saying I think he is a hero? Because I don't. You can stop using that word now.


Quote from: Herman on January 12, 2021, 12:55:31 AM
because he wanted to kill some.
Stop repeating the same thing- I already made the point that knowing his intent would be like reading his mind.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on January 12, 2021, 07:40:24 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 12, 2021, 12:55:31 AM
I haven't said that it's okay to destroy property for BLMers. I have said that it's to be expected, after significant social injustice, that property gets destroyed and looting occurs, not necessarily by BLM activists, but by opportunists in the bandwagon. This happens virtually every time since time immemorial.
I'll put my thoughts this way:
My point is, it's amusing to see the shift from a logical/explanatory mode of thought when talking about left wing violence.
And then go to an impassioned shift in tone when talking about right wing violence.

I'll just ask directly: you are against the acts of violence caused by the left in the previous months, correct?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on January 12, 2021, 08:24:20 AM
Quote from: greg on January 12, 2021, 07:40:24 AM
I'll put my thoughts this way:
My point is, it's amusing to see the shift from a logical/explanatory mode of thought when talking about left wing violence.
And then go to an impassioned shift in tone when talking about right wing violence.

I'll just ask directly: you are against the acts of violence caused by the left in the previous months, correct?

You are wrong on every point. BLM protests have nothing to do with right and left politics. The fact that more racist a$$holes are Republican, and so oppose BLM, doesn't make social justice for blacks a left political issue.

More important: Every one of the people who entered the capital on January 6 is a criminal. Only the small minority of people who looted and destroyed property, a good number of whom were counter protesters, were criminals.

Finally, the Trump administration fomented and carried out much of the violence surrounding the BLM protests under orders from an acting homeland security chief who had no legal standing  to give the orders in the first place.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 12, 2021, 08:29:38 AM

     FBI report warned of 'war' at Capitol, contradicting claims there was no indication of looming violence (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/capitol-riot-fbi-intelligence/2021/01/12/30d12748-546b-11eb-a817-e5e7f8a406d6_story.html)

A day before rioters stormed Congress, an FBI office in Virginia issued an explicit internal warning that extremists were preparing to travel to Washington to commit violence and "war," according to an internal document reviewed by The Washington Post that contradicts a senior official's declaration the bureau had no intelligence indicating anyone at last week's pro-Trump protest planned to do harm.

A situational information report approved for release the day before the U.S. Capitol riot painted a dire portrait of dangerous plans, including individuals sharing a map of the complex's tunnels, and possible rally points for would-be conspirators to meet up in Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts and South Carolina and head in groups to Washington.

"As of 5 January 2021, FBI Norfolk received information indicating calls for violence in response to 'unlawful lockdowns' to begin on 6 January 2021 in Washington. D.C.," the document says. "An online thread discussed specific calls for violence to include stating 'Be ready to fight. Congress needs to hear glass breaking, doors being kicked in, and blood from their BLM and Pantifa slave soldiers being spilled. Get violent. Stop calling this a march, or rally, or a protest. Go there ready for war. We get our President or we die. NOTHING else will achieve this goal."


     One of these statements is true.

     1) Trump was told that violence was coming, because explict warnings by the FBI don't bypass the President.

     2) Trump didn't know very much about the violent plans of the extremists. He was busy defending the country against all enemies foreign and domestic.

   
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 12, 2021, 09:06:35 AM
Quote from: greg on January 12, 2021, 07:40:24 AM


I'll just ask directly: you are against the acts of violence caused by the left in the previous months, correct?

     Can I play? I support the BLM protests and oppose the violence committed at BLM demonstrations. BLM doesn't just have a legitimate grievance, it's the gold standard of legitimacy by which public protests should be judged.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 12, 2021, 09:25:49 AM
Quote from: drogulus on January 12, 2021, 09:06:35 AM
     Can I play?

Yeah, please do.

I see the Texas Kid is out trolling again in a big way, and I've got better  things to do.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on January 12, 2021, 11:13:47 AM
Quote from: drogulus on January 12, 2021, 09:06:35 AM
     Can I play? I support the BLM protests and oppose the violence committed at BLM demonstrations.
You seem to be somewhat left-leaning, yet you have no problem condemning violence on both the left and the right. You can detach for a bit and think objectively. That's why you aren't a tribalist.

Yet I just asked Herman point blank if he disapproves of the violence on the left (since I know he does for the right) and am not getting a response. It's like pulling a tooth.
(reminds me of the criticism he had towards Trump about him not condemning right-wing violence swiftly enough)


Quote from: Herman on January 12, 2021, 09:25:49 AM
Texas Kid
I'm 33 and only lived in Texas for a year. Weird nickname to have. But ok.


Quote from: BasilValentine on January 12, 2021, 08:24:20 AM
You are wrong on every point. BLM protests have nothing to do with right and left politics. The fact that more racist a$$holes are Republican, and so oppose BLM, doesn't make social justice for blacks a left political issue.
More important: Every one of the people who entered the capital on January 6 is a criminal. Only the small minority of people who looted and destroyed property, a good number of whom were counter protesters, were criminals.
Regardless of whether or not everyone was there intentionally trying to enter the building (rather than staying outside to only protest)...
I'm comparing this to BLM riots, not to BLM protests. Everyone who rioted was doing something wrong. Everyone who entered the building (also rioting) did something wrong. That's all I'm trying to compare.
I don't have issues with peaceful protests.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 12, 2021, 11:47:58 AM
Quote from: drogulus on January 12, 2021, 08:29:38 AM
     FBI report warned of 'war' at Capitol, contradicting claims there was no indication of looming violence (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/capitol-riot-fbi-intelligence/2021/01/12/30d12748-546b-11eb-a817-e5e7f8a406d6_story.html)

A day before rioters stormed Congress, an FBI office in Virginia issued an explicit internal warning that extremists were preparing to travel to Washington to commit violence and "war," according to an internal document reviewed by The Washington Post that contradicts a senior official's declaration the bureau had no intelligence indicating anyone at last week's pro-Trump protest planned to do harm.

A situational information report approved for release the day before the U.S. Capitol riot painted a dire portrait of dangerous plans, including individuals sharing a map of the complex's tunnels, and possible rally points for would-be conspirators to meet up in Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts and South Carolina and head in groups to Washington.

"As of 5 January 2021, FBI Norfolk received information indicating calls for violence in response to 'unlawful lockdowns' to begin on 6 January 2021 in Washington. D.C.," the document says. "An online thread discussed specific calls for violence to include stating 'Be ready to fight. Congress needs to hear glass breaking, doors being kicked in, and blood from their BLM and Pantifa slave soldiers being spilled. Get violent. Stop calling this a march, or rally, or a protest. Go there ready for war. We get our President or we die. NOTHING else will achieve this goal."


     One of these statements is true.

     1) Trump was told that violence was coming, because explict warnings by the FBI don't bypass the President.

     2) Trump didn't know very much about the violent plans of the extremists. He was busy defending the country against all enemies foreign and domestic.

   

"Pantifa"?? Because they wear pants? Is this another right-wing attempt at wit?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 12, 2021, 12:18:55 PM
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-55631079

Three US lawmakers have tested positive for the coronavirus after sheltering for hours with colleagues during last week's deadly assault on the Capitol.

House Democrats Bonnie Watson Coleman, Pramila Jayapal and Brad Schneider have announced their diagnoses.

Last Wednesday they hunkered down in secure rooms, seeking refuge from an invasion of Congress in which five people died.

Some Republicans were not wearing masks during the ordeal, footage suggests.

Video shared by Punchbowl News shows several lawmakers apparently refusing facemasks offered to them.

Medical experts fear more lawmakers may have contracted the disease, potentially amounting to a super-spreader event at a time when coronavirus infections and deaths continue to rise in the US.

The US has recorded the highest number of coronavirus infections (22.6 million) and deaths (367,000) in the world, with no sign of the epidemic abating, despite the limited roll-out of vaccines.


Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 12, 2021, 12:19:31 PM
Officials from the Justice Department and FBI brief reporters on the latest developments in the federal investigation into the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol by supporters of President Trump, which resulted in the deaths of five people.

Acting U.S. Attorney Michael Sherwin from the Department of Justice was joined by Steven D'Antuono from the FBI's Washington Field Office.

https://muscatinejournal.com/news/national/watch-fbi-justice-department-press-conference-on-investigation-into-capitol-attack/article_3dd6dda1-a4e9-5290-9e05-ab39df409985.html
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 12, 2021, 12:25:25 PM
Quote from: T. D. on January 12, 2021, 12:18:55 PM
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-55631079

Three US lawmakers have tested positive for the coronavirus after sheltering for hours with colleagues during last week's deadly assault on the Capitol.

House Democrats Bonnie Watson Coleman, Pramila Jayapal and Brad Schneider have announced their diagnoses.

Last Wednesday they hunkered down in secure rooms, seeking refuge from an invasion of Congress in which five people died.

Some Republicans were not wearing masks during the ordeal, footage suggests.

Video shared by Punchbowl News shows several lawmakers apparently refusing facemasks offered to them.

Medical experts fear more lawmakers may have contracted the disease, potentially amounting to a super-spreader event at a time when coronavirus infections and deaths continue to rise in the US.

The US has recorded the highest number of coronavirus infections (22.6 million) and deaths (367,000) in the world, with no sign of the epidemic abating, despite the limited roll-out of vaccines.
I saw footage of the Democrat lawmaker who tried handing out masks to the folks (Republicans) and their refusals at wearing them.   >:( :(

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BWV 1080 on January 12, 2021, 12:41:37 PM
Concerned that, viewing Q-anon as a cult, they have reached a Jim Jones moment with the bullshit exposed and a hardened core of true believers is resorting to violence

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 12, 2021, 12:46:01 PM
Yes.

The Alt-Right Is Now the Entire Right. (https://thebulwark.com/the-alt-right-is-now-the-entire-right/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on January 12, 2021, 01:21:52 PM
Quote from: greg on January 12, 2021, 11:13:47 AM

Regardless of whether or not everyone was there intentionally trying to enter the building (rather than staying outside to only protest)...
I'm comparing this to BLM riots, not to BLM protests. Everyone who rioted was doing something wrong. Everyone who entered the building (also rioting) did something wrong. That's all I'm trying to compare.
I don't have issues with peaceful protests.

You're still way off the mark. In a number of cases, Trump's irregular forces, those employed in DC and in Portland, were the rioters. They initiated the violence without justification. The worst crimes committed at BLM protests were the violent attack on peaceful protesters in Lafayette Park and the illegal kidnapping of US citizens by personnel with no legal jurisdiction to enforce the law where they did in Oregon. These crimes were far more egregious than any perpetrated by BLM protesters.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 12, 2021, 01:39:44 PM
But the Fox etc spin of Both Sides Do It and Lets Talk About Freedom Of Speech Instead Of Insurrection And Coup has reached the YT-only "readership", even if they're unaware of the source and in who's service they're arguing.

Trickle-down propaganda. Its frighteningly efficient.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on January 12, 2021, 01:41:44 PM
Quote from: greg on January 12, 2021, 11:13:47 AM
I'm comparing this to BLM riots, not to BLM protests. Everyone who rioted was doing something wrong. Everyone who entered the building (also rioting) did something wrong. That's all I'm trying to compare.
I don't have issues with peaceful protests.

Yes, you do.  You keep conflating BLM with riots and rioters. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 12, 2021, 01:50:53 PM

     Rep. Liz Cheney will vote to impeach Trump.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 12, 2021, 02:11:30 PM

     The Cheney announcement isn't a surprise. But Mitch is signalling he wants Trump impeached, though he's said he wants to see what's in the bill. I didn't see that coming.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on January 12, 2021, 02:56:02 PM
Was also thinking about the censorship of Parler- banned because they didn't monitor their users content enough.
So, given how big Facebook, Twitter and Google are, pretty sure many crimes throughout the years have been coordinated using their platforms, but they aren't banning themselves.
Not saying Parler shouldn't have been banned.
But seems they should either hold themselves to the same standard or not apply that rule at all.


Quote from: Daverz on January 12, 2021, 01:41:44 PM
Yes, you do.  You keep conflating BLM with riots and rioters.
Maybe because they are mixed together. The riots were during BLM protests, not some isolated thing apart from that. And some people who partook were BLM supporters. So if I accidentally say "protestors" when I mean "rioters" or vice versa then that is my mistake.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on January 12, 2021, 05:18:08 PM
The already mentioned Seth Abramson has now launched a summarized complete theory on what happened on January 6th, based on some collected evidence so far, in 52 tweets.

Very interesting reading, of course subject to change.

https://mobile.twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1349142068061478912
https://mobile.twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1349155316018114560


Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 12, 2021, 11:58:54 PM
Trump has managed to sneak in another death sentence executed.

It's not just outrageous because executions are rare and on their way out, and lame duck executions haven't happened in decades, but this was a woman, too, which never happens.

This man gets a kick out of Americans dying, it's what he wanted ever since he placed those big ads for the execution of the Central Park Five (who were later acquitted).

Remember, too, one of his most notorious quotes is "I could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 13, 2021, 02:52:05 AM
On the flip side, some heartwarming photos:  tributes to the capitol police officers-- https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/12/politics/gallery/capitol-officers-tributes/index.html

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 13, 2021, 06:05:11 AM

     Ali Alexander was one of the organizers of the Jan. 6 event.

     https://www.youtube.com/v/99Xez3lkp_8&ab_channel=TheIntercept

     We will learn more about how much of an inside job this assault was.

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 13, 2021, 06:30:15 AM
     Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says she feared GOP lawmakers would lead rioters to her: 'I thought I was going to die' (https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/01/13/aoc-capitol-mob-republicans-death/)

As the pro-Trump rioters streamed into the Capitol on Jan. 6, lawmakers were told to take refuge in a protected "extraction point." But Ocasio-Cortez said she did not feel safe doing so "because there were QAnon and white-supremacist sympathizers and, frankly, white-supremacist members of Congress in that extraction point who I know and who I have felt would disclose my location and would create opportunities to allow me to be hurt, kidnapped, et cetera."

"So I didn't even feel safe around other members of Congress," she concluded. She did not say where she took shelter instead.

Ocasio-Cortez didn't name the lawmakers she thought might jeopardize her safety, but she is not the first to suggest some members of Congress could have deliberately put others at risk.


     Her fear was justified. Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) tweeted about the location of Nancy Pelosi during the riot. We know that Pelosi and Pence were targeted, and it would be surprising if AOC wasn't on the list.

     I had earlier thought Boebert had tweeted the location of her office. That wasn't true so I changed my comment.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 13, 2021, 06:33:41 AM
Boebert needs to be censured.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 13, 2021, 07:03:24 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 13, 2021, 06:33:41 AM
Boebert needs to be censured.

     From the Kansas City Star:

Boebert is facing calls for expulsion after posting on Twitter that Pelosi, the House speaker and second in the line of presidential succession, had been escorted out of the House chamber as rioters ransacked the Capitol building.

Members of the mob were recorded on video calling for the murder of both Pelosi and Vice President Mike Pence.

Boebert is facing calls for expulsion after posting on Twitter that Pelosi, the House speaker and second in the line of presidential succession, had been escorted out of the House chamber as rioters ransacked the Capitol building.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 13, 2021, 07:17:17 AM

     About the 'reconnaissance' tours, I'm not yet entirely convinced that House members knowingly provided tours on Jan. 5 as alleged by Rep. Mikie Sherrill (D-N.J.). She didn't provide names or indicate how she knew the tour groups were future rioters. The question of how the rioters obtained detailed info of the building is still open.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 13, 2021, 07:53:00 AM
I can't help but notice the loathsome Jim Jordan, wearing a facemask at the House podium, manages to make it a mouth mask, with the nose sticking out.

First one thinks he's too stupid to know you're also supposed to cover the nose, but it's probably another fuck-you gesture from the loathsome Jordan.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 13, 2021, 08:06:20 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 13, 2021, 07:53:00 AM
I can't help but notice the loathsome Jim Jordan, wearing a facemask at the House podium, manages to make it a mouth mask, with the nose sticking out.

First one thinks he's too stupid to know you're also supposed to cover the nose, but it's probably another fuck-you gesture from the loathsome Jordan.

     Jordan is the ranking member on the Judiciary Committee. That's pretty fucked up.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 13, 2021, 08:12:33 AM
Pictures of the National Guard currently resting (some sleeping) in the Capitol building [I imagine that at least some of them were up all night protecting it and the surrounding area.].  Meanwhile, the House is voting on impeachment....

(https://newswep.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Inauguration-Day-2021-National-Guard-troops-sleep-on-Congress-floor.jpg)

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 13, 2021, 08:20:34 AM
Quote from: drogulus on January 13, 2021, 08:06:20 AM
     Jordan is the ranking member on the Judiciary Committee. That's pretty fucked up.

Cheeto Mussolini bestowed the Presidential Medal of Freedom, America's highest civilian honor, to that abhorrent moron.

https://www.cleveland.com/darcy/2021/01/rep-jordan-medal-of-freedom-farce-darcy-cartoon.html
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 13, 2021, 08:30:42 AM


     I think coach Belichick was pressured into declining the medal. He's a Trump buddy.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 13, 2021, 09:06:18 AM
Quote from: T. D. on January 13, 2021, 08:20:34 AM
Cheeto Mussolini bestowed the Presidential Medal of Freedom, America's highest civilian honor, to that abhorrent moron.

https://www.cleveland.com/darcy/2021/01/rep-jordan-medal-of-freedom-farce-darcy-cartoon.html

That loathsome blowhard got the Prez Medal of Freedom?

I guess for talking over other people.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 13, 2021, 09:21:22 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 13, 2021, 09:06:18 AM
That loathsome blowhard got the Prez Medal of Freedom?

I guess for talking over other people.

Consider who bestowed it. It was for political services rendered.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 13, 2021, 09:22:54 AM
Screamin' Matt Gaetz is really something else.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 13, 2021, 10:11:35 AM
I caught two minutes on Al Jazeera of some arsehole from California saying that if everybody was punished for talking publicly the way Trump does there would be nobody left. That was as much as I could take.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Brahmsian on January 13, 2021, 10:21:47 AM
Six Republicans (so far) have announced that they will vote to impeach.

Those six can at least look at themselves in the mirror.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 13, 2021, 11:02:59 AM

     Mitch hates Trump very strongly. Note, though, that he's refusing to bring back the Senate early. I think his idea is that a late impeachment can only hurt Biden out of the gate.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 13, 2021, 11:03:59 AM
Reading these details for the first time:

The Guardian view on Trump's executions: vicious to the end
The federal execution of a woman who was mentally ill was the act of a morally bankrupt administration (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jan/13/the-guardian-view-on-trumps-executions-vicious-to-the-end)

"In the early hours of Wednesday morning, Lisa Montgomery became the first woman to be put to death by the United States government for almost seven decades. At the Indiana penitentiary where she was executed by lethal injection, there are no facilities for female prisoners. So during prolonged legal wrangling over her fate, Montgomery was cruelly placed in a holding cell in the execution-chamber building itself.

Her crime was horrific. In 2004, Montgomery strangled a young woman, Bobbie Jo Stinnett, who was eight months pregnant. She then cut a baby girl from her womb, and attempted to pass her off as her own. The pain and suffering of Ms Stinnett's family can barely be imagined. But the political context of this week's execution, and overwhelming evidence of Montgomery's longstanding mental illness, suggests a gross miscarriage of justice has taken place.

Issuing a stay of execution, subsequently overruled by the supreme court, a district judge cited evidence that "Ms Montgomery's mental state is so divorced from reality that she cannot rationally understand the government's rationale for her execution." Since entering the penitentiary system, the 52 year-old had been diagnosed with bipolar disorder, PTSD, anxiety and depression, psychosis, mood swings, dissociation and memory loss. Throughout her childhood, Montgomery was gang-raped by her alcoholic stepfather and his friends, in a cabin built for that purpose. She was physically tortured in myriad ways by both parents. Social workers and doctors failed to intervene. A consultant to her legal team said Montgomery was "profoundly mentally ill as a result of a lifetime of torture and sexual violence. Lisa is not the worst of the worst – she is the most broken of the broken." This was not enough to prevent her sharing the fate of 10 other prisoners executed by the government since July, when the Trump administration resumed the practice after a 17-year pause. In the history of US justice, there have never been so many scheduled federal executions during the lame-duck period of a presidency."[...]
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 13, 2021, 11:10:34 AM
Quote from: drogulus on January 13, 2021, 11:02:59 AM
     Mitch hates Trump very strongly. Note, though, that he's refusing to bring back the Senate early. I think his idea is that a late impeachment can only hurt Biden out of the gate.

Can't speak to the first point (obvious question: if true, why did McC bend over for Cheeto at every opportunity?). Strongly agree with the second.

Lotta gamesman(and woman)ship going on right now.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 13, 2021, 11:11:43 AM
It's Trump long wished-for killing spree, these lame-duck executions.

He's probably barely able to eat his hamberders, he's so excited.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 13, 2021, 11:15:43 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 13, 2021, 11:11:43 AM
It's Trump long wished-for killing spree, these lame-duck executions.

He's probably barely able to eat his hamberders, he's so excited.

No excuse, but this pretty much reflects GOP thinking. "Conservatives" have long lusted for more executions. They're currently throwing in some token whiteys to make the bloodlust appear racially impartial.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on January 13, 2021, 01:12:17 PM
This just in: the House voted for impeachment! WOO HOO!!! YES!!!

And now we wait to see what the Senate does. Unfortunately, they're not in session and, from my understanding, won't be until after Biden's inauguration.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Brahmsian on January 13, 2021, 01:40:28 PM
Quote from: OrchestralNut on January 13, 2021, 10:21:47 AM
Six Republicans (so far) have announced that they will vote to impeach.

Those six can at least look at themselves in the mirror.

I guess there were ten Republicans who voted for impeachment.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 13, 2021, 01:52:25 PM
Quote from: T. D. on January 13, 2021, 11:10:34 AM
Can't speak to the first point (obvious question: if true, why did McC bend over for Cheeto at every opportunity?).

     Mitch hates Trump for losing the Georgia races. For the most part, Mitch found it easier to hold his caucus together by siding with Trump consistently than opposing him, though he did on occasion. Still, Mitch hates Trump for his inability to do the job and the damage he's done to the party.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 13, 2021, 01:56:31 PM
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/12/mikie-sherrill-capitol-hill-attack-458655
https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/us-elections-government/ny-capitol-riot-new-jersey-congresswoman-video-20210113-snvwbe3aj5aqdo6vjr4i6ohzdu-story.html

New Jersey congresswoman says fellow lawmakers led groups through U.S. Capitol as 'reconnaissance' for deadly siege
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on January 13, 2021, 02:01:09 PM
Quote from: drogulus on January 13, 2021, 01:52:25 PM
     Mitch hates Trump for losing the Georgia races. For the most part, Mitch found it easier to hold his caucus together by siding with Trump consistently than opposing him, though he did on occasion. Still, Mitch hates Trump for his inability to do the job and the damage he's done to the party.

I would think many of the Republicans would want to put a stake through the fat ba$†ard's heart and keep him from ever running again. But alas, their cowardice and lust for power knows no bounds.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 13, 2021, 02:08:59 PM
     
Quote from: T. D. on January 13, 2021, 01:56:31 PM
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/12/mikie-sherrill-capitol-hill-attack-458655
https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/us-elections-government/ny-capitol-riot-new-jersey-congresswoman-video-20210113-snvwbe3aj5aqdo6vjr4i6ohzdu-story.html

New Jersey congresswoman says fellow lawmakers led groups through U.S. Capitol as 'reconnaissance' for deadly siege

The lawmakers, some of who "have served in the military and are trained to recognize suspicious activity," noted that Capitol tours have been prohibited since March as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic and they said the tours were so unusual that they were reported to security on Jan. 5, ahead of the following day's violence.

"The visitors encountered by some of the Members of Congress on this letter appeared to be associated with the rally at the White House the following day," they wrote. "Members of the group that attacked the Capitol seemed to have an unusually detailed knowledge of the layout of the Capitol Complex. The presence of these groups within the Capitol Complex was indeed suspicious."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on January 13, 2021, 02:09:25 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on January 13, 2021, 01:12:17 PM
This just in: the House voted for impeachment! WOO HOO!!! YES!!!

And now we wait to see what the Senate does. Unfortunately, they're not in session and, from my understanding, won't be until after Biden's inauguration.

Goddam WAPO, you buzzkills!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/01/12/once-trump-leaves-office-senate-cant-hold-an-impeachment-trial/
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on January 13, 2021, 02:12:52 PM
Quote from: Daverz on January 13, 2021, 02:09:25 PM
Goddam WAPO, you buzzkills!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/01/12/once-trump-leaves-office-senate-cant-hold-an-impeachment-trial/

Damn, you know I had completely forgotten about this possibility. I wonder if there's a chance they'd reconvene just for this vote?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 13, 2021, 02:20:26 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on January 13, 2021, 02:12:52 PM
Damn, you know I had completely forgotten about this possibility. I wonder if there's a chance they'd reconvene just for this vote?

I think the Senate would have to vote unanimously to reconvene early.
In other words, will never happen.
I'll look for the link I saw earlier.

Added: Not completely clear, though I say unlikely because McConnell would have to sign on.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/house-democrats-consider-impeachment-25th-amendment-measures-n1253693

According to a memo circulated by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., if the House impeaches Trump this week, the earliest the Senate could take up the articles would be Jan. 19, unless all 100 senators agree to come back early.

But Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., is exploring a possible workaround — using the authority granted to the two Senate leaders in 2004 to reconvene the Senate in times of emergency, a senior Democratic aide said. That would allow for a potential impeachment trial to begin immediately after articles of impeachment are sent.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on January 13, 2021, 02:48:17 PM
Quote from: T. D. on January 13, 2021, 02:20:26 PM
I think the Senate would have to vote unanimously to reconvene early.
In other words, will never happen.
I'll look for the link I saw earlier.

Added: Not completely clear, though I say unlikely because McConnell would have to sign on.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/house-democrats-consider-impeachment-25th-amendment-measures-n1253693

According to a memo circulated by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., if the House impeaches Trump this week, the earliest the Senate could take up the articles would be Jan. 19, unless all 100 senators agree to come back early.

But Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., is exploring a possible workaround — using the authority granted to the two Senate leaders in 2004 to reconvene the Senate in times of emergency, a senior Democratic aide said. That would allow for a potential impeachment trial to begin immediately after articles of impeachment are sent.

Since the Vice President is the one who presides over the Senate, couldn't Pence order them all to come back and vote?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 13, 2021, 03:55:43 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on January 13, 2021, 02:48:17 PM
Since the Vice President is the one who presides over the Senate, couldn't Pence order them all to come back and vote?

I have no idea. Not going to investigate, since I can't imagine Pence doing so. He already refused to go the 25th Amendment route.

Re. McConnell, here's an article that ventures into fantasy land:

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-01-13/will-mcconnell-do-to-trump-what-howe-did-to-thatcher

The possibility that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell might choose in the end to eviscerate Donald Trump instantly put me in mind of an only slightly less dramatic event in British politics — when, in 1990, a man long perceived as a weak and cringing loyalist stood up in the House of Commons and calmly murdered Margaret Thatcher.  :laugh:
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on January 13, 2021, 04:27:30 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on January 13, 2021, 02:48:17 PM
Since the Vice President is the one who presides over the Senate, couldn't Pence order them all to come back and vote?
I could be wrong but I think this is the prerogative of the leadership. For example, when Biden was VP, he couldn't order the majority-Republican Senate back. That's my GUESS.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 13, 2021, 04:30:56 PM
Interesting discussion of GOP power dynamics:

https://news.yahoo.com/impeachment-vote-reveals-gop-torn-over-how-to-deal-with-trump-224613925.html
...
And that is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to how grassroots purists and extremists now control much of American politics — in both parties to some extent, but in the Republican Party in particular. Many Republican members of Congress have been afraid to speak out against Trump or to vote for impeachment because they fear they and their families might be harmed, or even killed, by Trump supporters.

This terrible reality was reported by numerous press outlets, and the Republican member of Congress who spoke to Yahoo News last week expressed that same fear of bodily harm, or even death, for those who might oppose or seek to impose consequences on a lawless and lying president.

This congressman argued that a frontal assault would only make Trumpism stronger, because current GOP officeholders who vote for impeachment will lose their seats to more radical and far-right Republicans in party primaries. And due to a combination of political polarization and gerrymandering that has made so many congressional districts either safely Republican or Democratic, primaries are often the only races that members of Congress have to worry about.

"People don't seem to understand that the only election that matters is your primary," Brendan Buck, a onetime adviser to former House Speaker Paul Ryan, told Yahoo News.

That's a structural reality of American politics that is at the root of many problems. And it is a far bigger issue in the House, where members face reelection every two years.

...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on January 13, 2021, 04:50:37 PM
Quote from: Daverz on January 13, 2021, 02:09:25 PM
Goddam WAPO, you buzzkills!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/01/12/once-trump-leaves-office-senate-cant-hold-an-impeachment-trial/

That argument is probably not true, but there's enough doubt on the point that GOP senators will be able to use it as a justification for not voting for conviction. I predict only a handful of GOP senators will vote to convict, and no conviction will result.  I have no reason to not believe that most of the GOP thinks it necessary to placate the Trumpniks no matter what.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on January 13, 2021, 05:54:52 PM
Trump, the president of zero popular vote wins and two impeachments.  :P
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on January 13, 2021, 06:46:08 PM
In an interview conducted by Rachel Maddow, Representative Mikie Sherrill (D-NJ) claims that republican members of Congress and/or their staffs gave reconnaissance tours of the Capitol Building on January 5 to groups of insurrectionists who would attack it the next day. On January 5 the Capitol was officially closed to all tours due to Coivd restrictions and the only way a tour group could get access was in the company of a legislator or member of a legislator's staff. Sherrill intends to push for the exposure and expulsion of the members responsible for their part in this alleged abetting of insurrection. The segment begins at 28:50, the interview begins a few minutes later:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LhO6itfkLs0
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on January 13, 2021, 06:49:34 PM
Quote from: JBS on January 13, 2021, 04:50:37 PM
That argument is probably not true, but there's enough doubt on the point that GOP senators will be able to use it as a justification for not voting for conviction. I predict only a handful of GOP senators will vote to convict, and no conviction will result.  I have no reason to not believe that most of the GOP thinks it necessary to placate the Trumpniks no matter what.

Lo and behold Tom Cotton already saying it
https://mobile.twitter.com/maggieNYT/status/1349546681281507329
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on January 13, 2021, 07:03:02 PM
Quote from: JBS on January 13, 2021, 04:50:37 PM
That argument is probably not true, but there's enough doubt on the point that GOP senators will be able to use it as a justification for not voting for conviction. I predict only a handful of GOP senators will vote to convict, and no conviction will result.  I have no reason to not believe that most of the GOP thinks it necessary to placate the Trumpniks no matter what.

Lawrence Tribe does not agree with Luttig (who wrote that WAPO opinion piece):

https://www.youtube.com/v/HckxryPw6fI&feature=emb_logo&ab_channel=MatthewChapman

""Well, basically, the Constitution's text makes it clear that as long as you are on officer when you commit an impeachable offense, the ability to convict you and prevent you from repeating your dangerous activities doesn't cease," said Tribe. "If it were written otherwise, it would be crazy. The Secretary of War in 1876 thought he could game the system by resigning his office minutes before the impeachment was returned. But then the Senate, by a vote of 37-29 held understandably, you can't get away with it that way. It's not like when someone says you're fired, so you can't fire me, I've already resigned."

"The fact is that the Constitution was designed so that the most dangerous characters couldn't escape the important remedy of being taken out of public office in the future simply by resigning. That won't work," continued Tribe. "And, although there are some scholars I really admire — in particular Judge Michael Luttig, who doesn't agree with me but says he thinks I've got a powerful argument — I think the case is pretty clear, and there is a lot of argument, both historical and textual, for the view I have about this."

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on January 13, 2021, 10:16:46 PM
#45 "has instructed aides not to pay Giuliani's legal fees...and has demanded that he personally approve any reimbursements for the expenses Giuliani incurred while traveling on the president's behalf to challenge election results in key states."

"White House officials have started blocking Mr. Giuliani's calls to the president, another adviser said."

as per WAPO and NYT.







Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 14, 2021, 12:03:28 AM
Considering Republican lawmakers gave information and tours on Jan 5th to people who were going to break the law the next day in a big way, I think there needs to be a big rethink about making the Capitol and the White House 100% safe as to Biden and Harris being in the same room as dangerous nutcases like Boebert who insist on skipping the metal detectors because they want to be armed.

Back in 2009 or so you had this deranged representitive who called "You lie" during the State of the Union. Next time it can be a gunshot. These people have an extremily limited moral sense.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 14, 2021, 12:11:16 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on January 13, 2021, 10:16:46 PM
#45 "has instructed aides not to pay Giuliani's legal fees...and has demanded that he personally approve any reimbursements for the expenses Giuliani incurred while traveling on the president's behalf to challenge election results in key states."

"White House officials have started blocking Mr. Giuliani's calls to the president, another adviser said."



Isn't that totally Trump? Stiffing the contractors is what he's been doing for decades.

I keep thinking about that godawful guy Matt Gaetz who ended his extra-long speech on the floor yesterday by screaming and yelling.

Why would you do this, when you have a microphone, a camera right in front of you and about twenty colleagues barely listening because they've heard this over and over again?

It's from the dictator handbook: you have to yell and scream to scare the listeners at home into thinking the world is coming to an end.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on January 14, 2021, 12:30:13 AM
Forgot the exact source, but read that Giuliani's basic fee has been $ 20,000 per active day - presumably regardless of the number of blunders.

As mentioned earlier, during the Capitol riots he phoned the wrong congressman, leaving a potentially incriminating message on the mobile. His speech there was not good for procedures against #45 either.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 14, 2021, 12:38:06 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on January 14, 2021, 12:30:13 AM
Forgot the exact source, but read that Giuliani's basic fee has been $ 20,000 per active day - presumably regardless of the number of blunders.

That was just a fantasy number. As judges again and again suggested, Giuliani is not a serious lawyer; he cannot conduct a legal argument. It's all theatre for the fans at home, including breaking wind in the court room.

If you want, you can try and charge for this kind of stuff, but Giuliani's saying "we'll work something out in the end" again shows how needy and deeply clueless he is. Everyone knows Trump doesn't even pay for successful work if given the chance, let alone he's going to pay for failure.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 14, 2021, 04:16:33 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 14, 2021, 12:11:16 AM
Isn't that totally Trump? Stiffing the contractors is what he's been doing for decades.

Indeed.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 14, 2021, 04:17:52 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 14, 2021, 12:38:06 AM
That was just a fantasy number. As judges again and again suggested, Giuliani is not a serious lawyer; he cannot conduct a legal argument. It's all theatre for the fans at home, including breaking wind in the court room.

Performative assholery.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on January 14, 2021, 04:21:08 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 14, 2021, 12:38:06 AM
That was just a fantasy number. As judges again and again suggested, Giuliani is not a serious lawyer; he cannot conduct a legal argument. It's all theatre for the fans at home, including breaking wind in the court room.

Trump farted on his call with the Georgia AG. He farted and then apologized for farting. Just in case anyone is counting.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on January 14, 2021, 05:36:44 AM
Quote from: milk on January 14, 2021, 04:21:08 AM
Trump farted on his call with the Georgia AG. He farted and then apologized for farting. Just in case anyone is counting.

Trump admitted guilt and apologized? Never thought I'd hear that.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 14, 2021, 05:57:55 AM
Apart from not getting paid for making a total and irredeemable fool of himself, chances of Giuliani getting a pre-emptive pardon are pretty slim now, so he'd better get a suitcase ready for when it's time for jail.

Trump is now in the hard position of either giving a middle finger to DoJ by pardoning his former buddies, or giving his former buddies the same by not pardoning them. Choices, choices...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 14, 2021, 02:44:32 PM

     What's the best place to live that has no extradition treaty with the US? It's not for me, I'm staying put.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 14, 2021, 02:56:06 PM
Looking at the list - there's way more than I would have thought.

For myself I'd pick Vietnam.

For Trump? I was going to say Indonesia as the most highest populated Muslim country, but then remembered he's got businesses there, which it why it wasn't part of the Muslim Travel Ban. Gotta be Mainland China then.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 14, 2021, 07:24:40 PM
Its three days old but I'm reading this for the first time now:

GOP Sen. Susan Collins thought the mostly white pro-Trump mob that stormed the Capitol was 'the Iranians' at first (https://www.businessinsider.com.au/gop-sen-susan-collins-thought-capitol-siege-iranians-at-first-2021-1?r=US&IR=T)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 15, 2021, 12:56:08 AM
Susan Collins will never cease to amaze you with her dumbness.

This, of course, is the senator who held up the first Trump impeachment proceedings because she claimed to be thinking about it, and then she decided Trump would be chastened by having been impeached, and be a better man henceforth.

You really need to hear her say her stupid stuff for extra impact.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on January 15, 2021, 02:02:54 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on January 14, 2021, 05:36:44 AM
Trump admitted guilt and apologized? Never thought I'd hear that.
amazing as it seems, it's true. A friend of mine time-stamped and I checked it out. This is a verified trump fart and a verified trump, "excuse me."
Maybe a Jeopardy question.
"I'll take MAGA for 400 please."
"It is the only thing trump apologized for."
"What is a fart?"
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on January 15, 2021, 04:05:39 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 15, 2021, 12:56:08 AM
Susan Collins will never cease to amaze you with her dumbness.

This, of course, is the senator who held up the first Trump impeachment proceedings because she claimed to be thinking about it, and then she decided Trump would be chastened by having been impeached, and be a better man henceforth.

You really need to hear her say her stupid stuff for extra impact.

Time long overdue for Collins to retire.

Trump's behavior will never change.  He is a pathological narcissist which means various really bad things which include that he is and was always right, ("stable genius").  See ... Narcissistic Personality Disorder (https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/narcissistic-personality-disorder/symptoms-causes/syc-20366662)

I predicted (on other forums) months before the election the Trump couldn't handle defeat and rejection.  Sees I was right.  But subconsciously Trump suspected he might lose so he concocted the mail-in ballot fraud scenario.  Transparently he was setting himself up with an excuse for the election results:  that was obvious for anyone with a brain -- which excludes brainless dupes as well as self-interested lackeys and hangers-on.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mandryka on January 15, 2021, 04:17:32 AM
The Hacker Who Archived Parler Explains How She Did It (and What Comes Next)

https://www.vice.com/en/article/n7vqew/the-hacker-who-archived-parler-explains-how-she-did-it-and-what-comes-next
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 15, 2021, 10:13:54 AM

     A Republican senator from Oklahoma apologizes to Black constituents for seeking to disenfranchise them. (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/15/us/politics/lankford-apology-election.html)

     What for is there an apology? Repubs don't apologize for racist vote suppression, they are the practitioners of it. Is Sen. Lankford on drugs?

"After decades of fighting for voting rights, many Black friends in Oklahoma saw this as a direct attack on their right to vote, for their vote to matter, and even a belief that their votes made an election in our country illegitimate," he wrote, according to the news site Tulsa World.

Mr. Lankford said in the letter that he had never intended to "diminish the voice of any Black American." Still, he added, "I should have recognized how what I said and what I did could be interpreted by many of you."


    Sen. Lankford doesn't want to be misinterpreted.

Mr. Lankford and other Republicans had claimed that by challenging the election results, they were exercising their independence and acting in the interests of constituents who were demanding answers.

"There are lots of folks in my state that still want those answers to come out," Mr. Lankford said a few days before the Electoral College vote was certified.


     White people want answers, that's all.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 15, 2021, 11:14:14 AM
meanwhile at Fox:

(https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNTQ1MDI1NS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyMDY1NDEzNX0.HO_EAlk-qEVlPPgyMvCJpzzo4E9LaOUoHzY_vt3bqv4/img.jpg?width=1200&coordinates=0%2C0%2C0%2C84&height=600)


I just heard someone compare the Republicans now calling for "unity" yo an abusive husband saying "stop your bitching about me hitting you - if you want peace in this house then keep your mouth shut".
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on January 15, 2021, 11:31:26 AM
Those legal steps from Dominion voting systems can be pretty effective.

Here's a another example, just in:
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/01/statement.html

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 15, 2021, 11:40:21 AM
Apparently demonstrators came within 100 feet of Mike Pence..and his family!

https://www.forbes.com/sites/tommybeer/2021/01/15/report-capitol-mob-came-within-100-feet-of-pence/?sh=37b4d07018e6

I heard the news on CNN, but here is a link to an article about it.  Also, I caught some horribly disturbing videos and interviews with police as to what they went through there.  Also heard there:  Trump wants a military-style sendoff!  ::)

PD

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 15, 2021, 11:44:08 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on January 15, 2021, 11:31:26 AM
Those legal steps from Dominion voting systems can be pretty effective.

Here's a another example, just in:
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/01/statement.html
Interesting, MT.  I know that Dominion is gearing up to sue Trump and others for their lies and the damage to their brand.

PD

EDIT:  Ah, I just caught your first sentence.  I don't know anything about American Thinker, but wondering whether or not they were in the process of being sued?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 15, 2021, 11:49:16 AM
But as with the Washington Times retracted "Antifa infiltrators in the insurrection" claim the retraction will have nowhere near the transmission the original bullshit did.

I hope Dominion go ahead with their lawsuit.

I hadn't heard of AmericanThinker - or if I had I've forgotten - but looking into them now they seem well nutty. From Wikipedia:

"Right Wing Watch points out that American Thinker has published a complimentary piece on white nationalist Jared Taylor, and asserted that rainbow-colored Doritos are a "gateway snack to introduce children to the joys of homosexuality"
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on January 15, 2021, 11:50:01 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on January 15, 2021, 11:44:08 AM
Interesting, MT.  I know that Dominion is gearing up to sue Trump and others for their lies and the damage to their brand.

PD

EDIT:  Ah, I just caught your first sentence.  I don't know anything about American Thinker, but wondering whether or not they were in the process of being sued?

Yes, they were!
The Wiki page didn't tell of the estimated number of readers though ...

BTW, I saw some headlines that Sidney Powell and even Giuliani aren't really on Fox any longer. Probably less appearances, at least.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 15, 2021, 11:53:01 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on January 15, 2021, 11:50:01 AM
Yes, they were!
The Wiki page didn't tell of the estimated number of readers though ...
You wonder re a number of these websites/blogs, do they really believe any of what they're spouting, or are they just in it for the money?

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 15, 2021, 11:55:16 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on January 15, 2021, 11:50:01 AM

The Wiki page didn't tell of the estimated number of readers though ...


https://www.similarweb.com/website/americanthinker.com/
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on January 15, 2021, 11:59:58 AM
Thank you!

Well, a bit less than 7 mio. website visits - so not among the tiniest of sketchy pamphlets ...

BTW Bannon is getting increased attention again, since he's been more in contact with #45 in recent weeks, being out on a bail
https://www.vice.com/en/article/n7vqgb/steve-bannon-urged-facebook-followers-to-take-action-on-eve-of-capitol-riot?utm_source=vicenewsfacebook
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 15, 2021, 12:03:39 PM
Quote from: MusicTurner on January 15, 2021, 11:59:58 AM
Thank you!

Well, a bit less than 7 mio. website visits - so not among the tiniest of sketchy pamphlets ...

BTW Bannon is getting increased attention again, since he's been more in contact with #45 in recent weeks, being out on a bail
https://www.vice.com/en/article/n7vqgb/steve-bannon-urged-facebook-followers-to-take-action-on-eve-of-capitol-riot?utm_source=vicenewsfacebook
God, the last thing that we need!  ::)  >:(
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 15, 2021, 12:16:44 PM
Just heard somebody say that all you need to know about white privilege is that the insurrectionist Q shaman guy refused to eat the prison food he was given, demanded organically grown fare, and they went out and found what would be more pleasing to his worldview and taste.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 15, 2021, 12:30:31 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on January 15, 2021, 12:16:44 PM
Just heard somebody say that all you need to know about white privilege is that the insurrectionist Q shaman guy refused to eat the prison food he was given, demanded organically grown fare, and they went out and found what would be more pleasing to his worldview and taste.
I have a different take of it from here:

"He hasn't eaten since Friday and he gets very sick if he doesn't eat organic food – literally, will get physically sick," his mother, Martha Chansley, told reporters, according to ABC 15 in Phoenix.

The U.S. Marshals told the station that Chansley will be given "a shaman's strict organic diet" in accordance with the judge's order to work with his attorney. A later statement from the court clarified that the order was pursuant to "any legitimate dietary needs Mr. Chansley may have."

The above was from the Huffington Post.  Perhaps I'm wrong? 

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 15, 2021, 12:45:57 PM
I'm sure the reporting is correct . But what condition - apart from orthorexia - is he claimed to have for this to be a "legitimate dietary needs"

And, more to my point,  would they be making such an allowance for a BLM leader? Even at their mothers pleading? Even with more specific reasons given?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 15, 2021, 01:44:17 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on January 15, 2021, 12:45:57 PM
I'm sure the reporting is correct . But what condition - apart from orthorexia - is he claimed to have for this to be a "legitimate dietary needs"

And, more to my point,  would they be making such an allowance for a BLM leader? Even at their mothers pleading? Even with more specific reasons given?
Perhaps I'm misunderstanding things, but to me it sounded like that they were saying if he really needed certain dietary requirements (as in was allergic)?  And did they really shop for organic food for him?  This is what I'm trying to figure out what happened?  And, yes, that certainly wouldn't be fair, if that happened, to others!

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on January 15, 2021, 05:19:37 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/01/15/pillow-salesman-apparently-has-some-ideas-about-declaring-martial-law/

I do not use a "My Pillow".  I've mostly used memory foam pillows.  My current pillow is a wedge-shaped thing meant to elevate your head.   Do I need to call them and ask their feelings about Mussolini?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on January 15, 2021, 06:50:35 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on January 15, 2021, 12:45:57 PM
I'm sure the reporting is correct . But what condition - apart from orthorexia - is he claimed to have for this to be a "legitimate dietary needs"

And, more to my point,  would they be making such an allowance for a BLM leader? Even at their mothers pleading? Even with more specific reasons given?

I believe he's claiming religious reasons for his diet. In the meantime he's been denied bail because he's deemed too likely to flee to another country.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on January 15, 2021, 06:56:00 PM
All of this stuff happening right now and Trump still has four days in office left. :-\

Here are a few hypothetical questions for everyone: do you think if these rioters show up fully armed and ready to kill that it will trigger a civil war? What is the likelihood this could happen and what will be the repercussions for such an act?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 15, 2021, 07:22:44 PM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on January 15, 2021, 11:40:21 AM
Apparently demonstrators came within 100 feet of Mike Pence..and his family!

https://www.forbes.com/sites/tommybeer/2021/01/15/report-capitol-mob-came-within-100-feet-of-pence/?sh=37b4d07018e6 (https://www.forbes.com/sites/tommybeer/2021/01/15/report-capitol-mob-came-within-100-feet-of-pence/?sh=37b4d07018e6)

I heard the news on CNN, but here is a link to an article about it.  Also, I caught some horribly disturbing videos and interviews with police as to what they went through there.  Also heard there:  Trump wants a military-style sendoff!  ::)

PD



Have him walk the plank!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 15, 2021, 07:23:54 PM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on January 15, 2021, 11:53:01 AM
You wonder re a number of these websites/blogs, do they really believe any of what they're spouting, or are they just in it for the money?

PD

They've been monetizing disinformation for years.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 16, 2021, 12:07:02 AM
What is one supposed to picture with a "military-style sendoff", assuming he's not thinking about back-against-a-wall facing-gunpoints?

It sounds like he's still living the delusion that everybody thinks he's this great guy.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 16, 2021, 12:31:46 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on January 15, 2021, 06:56:00 PM
All of this stuff happening right now and Trump still has four days in office left. :-\

Here are a few hypothetical questions for everyone: do you think if these rioters show up fully armed and ready to kill that it will trigger a civil war? What is the likelihood this could happen and what will be the repercussions for such an act?

From this distance: no and no - now that everyone is prepared.

Hope I'm right.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 16, 2021, 02:34:47 AM
https://news.yahoo.com/huffpost/franklin-graham-republicans-trump-impeachment-002343804.html

Carol Kuruvilla·Religion Reporter, HuffPost
Fri, January 15, 2021, 7:23 PM

Franklin Graham, son of the late American evangelist Billy Graham, has supported Donald Trump through some of the most controversial moments of his presidency.

This week, Graham proved that Trump could incite a mob of hundreds to storm the U.S. Capitol in protest of the results of a presidential election and still not lose Graham's support.

In a Facebook post, Graham compared the 10 Republican House members who voted for Trump's impeachment on Wednesday to Judas Iscariot, the apostle notorious for betraying Jesus for 30 pieces of silver.

"Shame, shame," Graham wrote Thursday. "After all that he has done for our country, you would turn your back and betray him so quickly?"

"It makes you wonder what the thirty pieces of silver were that Speaker Pelosi promised for this betrayal," he added, referring to the Democratic House leader.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 16, 2021, 03:36:30 AM
Just watched a segment on CNN in which one of the anchors talked about his use of gumballs to give viewers a sense of the number of false and misleading statements that Trump has made over the course of his time in the White House (according to reports from the Washington Post).  Hard to fathom....roughly 30,000+!

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on January 16, 2021, 05:11:37 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on January 16, 2021, 03:36:30 AM
Just watched a segment on CNN in which one of the anchors talked about his use of gumballs to give viewers a sense of the number of false and misleading statements that Trump has made over the course of his time in the White House (according to reports from the Washington Post).  Hard to fathom....roughly 30,000+!

PD

Yeah, that was Victor Blackwell.  You've got to wonder why people are able to believe an endless stream of lies and misinformation ... is it because they want to believe it?

It's a dangerous place when people believe what they want to instead of what is founded on facts and reason.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Que on January 16, 2021, 05:37:00 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on January 16, 2021, 05:11:37 AM

It's a dangerous place when people believe what they want to instead of what is founded on facts and reason.

Basic human nature, I'm afraid.

This is why there is a heavy burden of responsibility on politicians, civil servants and journalists to tell or uncover the truth.
Any lie is afterall designed to sound much more appealing than any truth.

Q
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 16, 2021, 05:45:31 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on January 16, 2021, 05:11:37 AM
Yeah, that was Victor Blackwell.  You've got to wonder why people are able to believe an endless stream of lies and misinformation ... is it because they want to believe it?

It's a dangerous place when people believe what they want to instead of what is founded on facts and reason.
Oh, to be delusional!  ::)  :(
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on January 16, 2021, 05:59:19 AM
Quote from: Que on January 16, 2021, 05:37:00 AM
Basic human nature, I'm afraid.

Before you posted this, I typed something along the same lines but didn't click "Post" because it would have been a violation of my own resolution not to post in political threads anymore. Your post above, which is only too true, encourages me to do it nevertheless. So here is what I have to say with respect to the topic at hand:

The world at large has always been a very dangerous place.



Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on January 16, 2021, 06:11:25 AM
Quote from: Florestan on January 16, 2021, 05:59:19 AM
Before you posted this, I typed something along the same lines but didn't click "Post" because it would have been a violation of my own resolution not to post in political threads anymore. Your post above, which is only too true, encourages me to do it nevertheless. So here is what I have to say with respect to the topic at hand:

The world at large has always been a very dangerous place.

Indeed.  If ever the USA was "a city upon a hill" that day has past:  a great pity.  To whom can the world look today for leadership?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on January 16, 2021, 06:21:25 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on January 16, 2021, 06:11:25 AM
Indeed.  If ever the USA was "a city upon a hill" that day has past:  a great pity.  To whom can the world look today for leadership?

I beg to differ. If anything, the last two weeks have shown the world that democracy and rule of law are resilient and fully functional in the USA --- and that they can still teach the whole world a thing or two about them. As far as I'm concerned, the democratic, freedom-loving world can have no other leader than the one they had for decades, namely the USA. There'll be a cold day in Hell before China or Russia would take their place.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Brahmsian on January 16, 2021, 06:31:31 AM
Quote from: Florestan on January 16, 2021, 06:21:25 AM
I beg to differ. If anything, the last two weeks have shown the world that democracy and rule of law are resilient and fully functional in the USA --- and that they can still teach the whole world a thing or two about them. As far as I'm concerned, the democratic, freedom-loving world can have no other leader than the one they had for decades, namely the USA. There'll be a cold day in Hell before China or Russia would take their place.

Hmmm, I think the bar is set extremely low if we still consider the USA as being the beacon and pillar of democracy. Notwithstanding comparing it to Russia, China, North Korea, etc.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on January 16, 2021, 06:43:33 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on January 16, 2021, 12:31:46 AM
From this distance: no and no - now that everyone is prepared.

Hope I'm right.

I hope you're right as well. Crossing my fingers nothing terrible happens.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on January 16, 2021, 06:44:36 AM
Quote from: OrchestralNut on January 16, 2021, 06:31:31 AM
Hmmm, I think the bar is set extremely low if we still consider the USA as being the beacon and pillar of democracy.

Is it really? I do wonder how many European countries would have withstood such an unprecedented assault on their democracy and rule of law had it been incited / planned from such high levels of executive power and directed against the very place where representative democracy takes place. Actually, given the historical experience of Europe, I don't wonder at all. As opposed to the USA, all important European countries and many of the less important ones, including my own, have experienced dictatorship. Whether one likes it or not, the USA is the only important Western country which has had an uninterrupted democratic regime ever since its foundation. I was never concerned that Trump could have changed it, I am not concerned that anyone can change it in the foreseeable future. American Exceptionalism is a fact, at least in this respect. I'm more concerned about radicalism, both right and left, in Europe.

EDIT: I did not compare the USA democracy and rule of law to Russia, China or North Korea, which are not democracies and ruled by law by any stretch of any standards. I simply said that the USA is still the Western world's leading expert on democracy and rule of law. See you all on January 20th.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 16, 2021, 09:27:31 AM
Misinformation dropped dramatically the week after Twitter banned Trump

A small town seethes after learning one of its own says he joined mob
In Aberdeen, Md., the police chief's son declared he had "stormed the Capitol," prompting the same reckoning underway in communities across the country.

And:

Before he stormed the Capitol, ex-W.Va. lawmaker harassed women at an abortion clinic. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2021/01/16/derrick-evans-abortion-clinic/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on January 16, 2021, 09:45:51 AM
Quote from: Florestan on January 16, 2021, 06:21:25 AM
I beg to differ. If anything, the last two weeks have shown the world that democracy and rule of law are resilient and fully functional in the USA --- and that they can still teach the whole world a thing or two about them. As far as I'm concerned, the democratic, freedom-loving world can have no other leader than the one they had for decades, namely the USA. There'll be a cold day in Hell before China or Russia would take their place.

I never thought that I would see a rabble storming the US Capital with the intent of roughing-up, or worse, duly elected Congressmen.  In fact I never thought I'd ever see such a life-long low-life as Trump elected President and perhaps 40% of people believing his transparent lies.  But I've seen it with my own eyes.

But you're right that there aren't any candidates to step up and take America's place if America fails.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on January 16, 2021, 10:08:58 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on January 15, 2021, 06:56:00 PM
Here are a few hypothetical questions for everyone: do you think if these rioters show up fully armed and ready to kill that it will trigger a civil war? What is the likelihood this could happen and what will be the repercussions for such an act?

The likelihood would be a whole lot less had the insurrectionists been met with appropriate force on January 6. The authorities had better be ready to use deadly force at any subsequent uprisings if they hope to suppress these thugs. And to mete out maximum sentences for all convicted on misdemeanor or felony charges.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 16, 2021, 10:11:05 AM
Quote from: Florestan on January 16, 2021, 06:44:36 AM
As opposed to the USA, all important European countries and many of the less important ones, including my own, have experienced dictatorship.

Well, that didn't last long, your plans to steer clear.

The above is obviously nonsense  -  or perhaps your "important countries just happen to be the ones that have "experienced dictatorship".

Pretty much every American with a sense of right and wrong has been saying this was the absolute nadir of democracy in the USA, and you seem to be saying it showed itself at its best. It did not. It's going to take a long time to get back. Maybe Rumania is not the best place to make sweeping statements about America.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 16, 2021, 10:29:45 AM

     If Repub state officials in battleground states had not chickened out, Trump would have pulled off a coup. Simply put, champion vote suppressors in Georgia Kemp and Raffensperger chickened out. An obscure election official in Michigan certified the results in his state. The Arizona governor wouldn't answer the phone. My point is that a democracy is not secure if only a handful of failure points miraculously refused to fail. If we need Demon Gov. Kemp to save us we are not secure.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 16, 2021, 10:39:45 AM
The crisis here is not yet over. America can yet fail, or overcome.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 16, 2021, 12:05:24 PM
Some bits of news:

Heard earlier this afternoon on CNN:  A man from Virginia was arrested trying to enter (driving) the DC area with a fake inaugural pass, a gun, and rounds of ammunition.

Trump may not be able to live at Mar-a-lago full time due to an agreement that he made with the city in order to get some concessions/breaks.  According to the rules (when he was wanting to set it up as a club), no one (members) can stay there for more than 3 weeks in 7 day periods and not consecutively.  And it applies to all members.  Apparently Palm Beach didn't enforce this whilst he was president (even allowing a helipad there).  Here's the story that I heard:  https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2021/01/16/trump-mar-a-lago-move-pushback-kaye-pkg-ac360-vpx.cnn

PF
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 16, 2021, 12:18:36 PM
I like to imagine a King Lear scenario where he tells his three oldest he's going to live with each of them on a rotating basis.

Yeah, there's no Cordelia in this version.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 16, 2021, 12:34:27 PM
EDIT to my above comment:  apparently the man was arrested in downtown DC?!

Simon:  Eh, I don't see him living with his kids.  Sorry, but I don't remember who it was, suggesting that he buy another property in PB.

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 16, 2021, 12:36:06 PM
Trump leaves behind a Republican Party both broken and still in his grip, Dan Balz of the WaPo

In four years, Trump ideologically twisted a party that once had a coherent conservative governing philosophy, which he does not. He put a vise grip on the party's grass roots and persuaded many of them to believe that truth does not matter. He opened up the party's coalition to an emboldened white supremacist movement.

The party's deterioration has been an ongoing story of the Trump presidency, but the damage done and the challenge of restoration have been underlined in the weeks since President-elect Joe Biden won the election with a comfortable electoral college majority and a decisive margin in the popular vote, amid no evidence of widespread fraud.

It was widely noted this past week when 10 Republicans joined House Democrats to support impeaching the president for a second time. Foremost among those dissenters from the party line was Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming, the third-ranking Republican in the House and the daughter of former vice president Richard B. Cheney. Her denunciation of the president's role in inciting a mob attack on the Capitol was as devastating as it was succinct. Her words and vote were a marker put down for the future.

More significant for the party's future than the 10 who voted to impeach was the fact that — in the face of an insurrection at the Capitol that resulted in the death of a police officer and four rioters, that threatened lives of lawmakers and their staffs and that came after Trump had whipped up a rally with rhetoric inveighing against weakness in trying to overturn the election — there were still 197 Republicans who voted not to impeach. However uncomfortable they were with Trump's role in the mob action, as some expressed, they nonetheless marched in lockstep as they have for four years.

If that vote were not evidence enough of Trump's hold on the party, what about the day the Capitol was ransacked? After the building had been secured and lawmakers had gone back to work on the night of Jan. 6, 147 Republicans in the House and Senate, including House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy of California, still supported one or both of the objections to the electoral college counts in Arizona and Pennsylvania.

And if all that weren't evidence enough of the party's incapacity to break with Trump, what about the 126 Republicans who in December joined the Texas lawsuit that sought to overturn the results of the election in four states after repeated efforts, legal and otherwise, to claim fraud had evaporated under scrutiny?

Did all those Republicans who opposed impeachment, supported the objections to the electoral college count and asked the Supreme Court to overturn the election believe what Trump said about a stolen election or believe that he is not responsible for inciting those who stormed the Capitol?

Some may have, but probably far from all. More likely is that for many this was one more example of how the bullying that has been part of Trump's playbook has affected the behavior of elected officials. Trump has intimidated them, making examples of any who openly challenged or criticized him by threatening them with primary challenges or worse.

Republicans say they got something out of this bargain with the leader most never wanted as their nominee in 2016 — more conservative judges, big tax cuts, regulatory rollbacks. But the costs have been sizable: the loss of the House, the Senate and the White House, all of which can be laid at Trump's feet. The path of least resistance that many Republicans have trod proved to have serious consequences. Party leaders, through silence but often also through verbal assent, allowed things to spiral downward.

Republicans are now two parties, the party of Trump and the party of Never Trump, and the lines are more clearly defined than ever. Republicans are conflicted, many recognizing the damage they know Trump has done while saying to themselves that they still managed to pick up seats in the House in November and could take it back in 2022. To say Republicans face a time of testing and introspection understates the period ahead.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 16, 2021, 01:57:11 PM
Listening to David Axelrod in a recent podcast and he reminded his co-hosts of Trump's words back in September:

"Speaker 2: (08:48)
[crosstalk 00:08:48] Right here, Mr. President, real quickly. Win, loser, draw in this election. Will you commit here today for a peaceful transfer of power after the election, either-

Speaker 2: (09:03)
Transferal of power after the election. And there has been rioting [inaudible 00:00:07], there's been rioting in many cities across this country, your so-called red and blue states. Will you commit to making sure that there is a peaceful transferal of power after the election?

President Donald Trump: (09:16)
Well, we're going to have to see what happens. You know that I've been complaining very strongly about the ballots. And the ballots are a disaster.

Speaker 2: (09:23)
I understand that but people are rioting. Do you commit to making sure that there's a peaceful transferal of power?

President Donald Trump: (09:29)
We want to have... Get rid of the ballots and we'll have a very peaceful... There won't be a transfer frankly, there'll be a continuation. The ballots are out of control. You know it, and you know who knows it better than anybody else? The Democrats know it better than anybody else."


transcript from:
https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-white-house-press-briefing-transcript-september-23
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 16, 2021, 02:46:34 PM
Yup, contemptible weasel in a toupée
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 17, 2021, 02:58:32 PM
I find the Lincoln Project's podcast to be uneven and hardly ever listen, but I saw as a sidebar to something else that their latest posting was a repeat of an interview they did with Anne Applebaum back in August which is really superb and speaks directly to the current moment:

Trump vs Democracy Revisited: Anne Applebaum on Authoritarianism (https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5tZWdhcGhvbmUuZm0vVFNLNzc5ODg0OTIwNA/episode/NmFjZjBhMDgtNTZkNC0xMWViLWFlNGEtZmIyZGZhMGExYTBi?hl=en-NZ)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 18, 2021, 09:10:02 AM

     Rep. Steve Cohen Says He Saw Lauren Boebert Giving Tour Before Capitol Riot Day (https://www.thedailybeast.com/rep-steve-cohen-says-he-saw-rep-lauren-boebert-giving-tour-before-capitol-riot-day?ref=home)

     Boebert denies giving a tour to "any outside groups of 'insurrectionists.'" The tourists weren't supposed to be there, that we know. Tours were ended in March, 2020. That's why suspicion was aroused among a number of members who witnessed the tours.

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: bhodges on January 18, 2021, 03:31:39 PM
ProPublica has assembled an astonishing archive of over 500 film clips from Jan. 6, created from posts on Parler before the site was taken offline. The clips are in chronological order, with a clickable timeline to jump to a particular time of day.

https://projects.propublica.org/parler-capitol-videos/?id=0PewiHC6MJ7W

--Bruce
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 18, 2021, 08:38:07 PM
Pink seesaws across US-Mexico border named Design of the Year 2020 (https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2021/jan/19/pink-seesaws-across-us-mexico-border-named-design-of-the-year-2020)

(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/5a45525ddd598b1f981fd1be938299afe1d7c9b5/0_0_5472_3283/master/5472.jpg?width=620&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=f1c8c039c238178b05cd8143244ae5f4)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 19, 2021, 03:46:10 AM
Quote from: drogulus on January 18, 2021, 09:10:02 AM
     Rep. Steve Cohen Says He Saw Lauren Boebert Giving Tour Before Capitol Riot Day (https://www.thedailybeast.com/rep-steve-cohen-says-he-saw-rep-lauren-boebert-giving-tour-before-capitol-riot-day?ref=home)

     Boebert denies giving a tour to "any outside groups of 'insurrectionists.'" The tourists weren't supposed to be there, that we know. Tours were ended in March, 2020. That's why suspicion was aroused among a number of members who witnessed the tours.

   
I had heard/read that she had been suspected of doing that.  You would think (particularly considering that this was very unusual circumstances) that there would have been 1) a list of who was giving the tour and also of who was in the tour, and 2) that there would also have been some security footage too--at least in the hallways or by entrances, etc.?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on January 19, 2021, 04:30:34 AM
Quote from: Florestan on January 16, 2021, 06:21:25 AM
I beg to differ. If anything, the last two weeks have shown the world that democracy and rule of law are resilient and fully functional in the USA --- and that they can still teach the whole world a thing or two about them. As far as I'm concerned, the democratic, freedom-loving world can have no other leader than the one they had for decades, namely the USA. There'll be a cold day in Hell before China or Russia would take their place.
It's emboldened China and Russia and weakened the U.S. I think it was Todd, who hasn't appeared of late, who kept making the case that Trump's behavior was no big deal and more to celebrate than despise. But one might ask the question, do customs have a function and meaning in U.S. democracy? I could be wrong as far as history goes but trump is at least one of the only U.S. presidents to threaten to reject and then reject the outcome of an election, to fail to attend his successor's inauguration, to attack military families, to suggest "second amendment remedies," to attack people with disabilities, to call for other countries to intervene in U.S. elections, etc.
His prominent supporters made the gamble that they could work with him and harness his popularity for their own gain. They believed that he couldn't do that much damage or the damage wouldn't matter much. They rationalized it. Ted Cruz, for all the craven buffoon that he is, knew very well that Trump lost the election. He sought his own advantage and he lost the gamble.
In my opinion, people who argued that trump was no big problem lost the bet. Now we see that fantasists from online forums have enacted their violent delusions in the reality. Worse still, tens of millions of people do not accept the results of a democratic election. How myopic are republicans that they think this won't corrode elections for everyone. Maybe a republican presidential candidate has won the popular vote once in the last 6 presidential elections. Rejecting elections is a bad precedent for them too since they don't seem capable of winning a popular vote.
I disagree that we're seeing how strong American democracy is. We're seeing how fragile it is and reliant on customs to keep worse things from happening. Now the left is gleeful about big media platforms erasing people. The right rightfully complains about "cancel culture" in its latest iteration. But they're complicit in it when they've trampled over all customs, norms, precedents, etc. And what's a conservative who wants to blow up bridges and reject societal norms and customs? Not a conservative at all: a radical!         
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 19, 2021, 05:18:14 AM
Quote from: drogulus on January 18, 2021, 09:10:02 AM
     Rep. Steve Cohen Says He Saw Lauren Boebert Giving Tour Before Capitol Riot Day (https://www.thedailybeast.com/rep-steve-cohen-says-he-saw-rep-lauren-boebert-giving-tour-before-capitol-riot-day?ref=home)

     Boebert denies giving a tour to "any outside groups of 'insurrectionists.'" The tourists weren't supposed to be there, that we know. Tours were ended in March, 2020. That's why suspicion was aroused among a number of members who witnessed the tours.

   

Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on January 19, 2021, 03:46:10 AM


I had heard/read that she had been suspected of doing that.  You would think (particularly considering that this was very unusual circumstances) that there would have been 1) a list of who was giving the tour and also of who was in the tour, and 2) that there would also have been some security footage too--at least in the hallways or by entrances, etc.?

Congresswoman Boebert says that she was only giving a tour to her family.

"The only people I have ever had in the Capitol with me are my young children, husband, mom, aunt and uncle," Boebert wrote in the letter to Maloney. "My mother was the only one of those family members in Washington D.C. on the 6th. During the riots, my mother was locked in a secure location, not in the U.S. Capitol, with my staff and never left their sight."

Prior to the pandemic, the public had wide-ranging access to the Capitol complex, including the tunnels connecting the member office buildings to the Capitol itself. The Sergeant at Arms banned all tours of the Capitol Grounds at the start of the pandemic, but members of Congress were able to ignore the guidance. Lawmakers or staff led tours have never had to register visitors with Capitol Police, a law enforcement official with direct knowledge of overall protocols told CNN.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/18/politics/steve-cohen-lauren-boebert-capitol-tours/?hpt=ob_blogfooterold
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 19, 2021, 07:55:08 AM
So, the Trumps are leaving town...no welcoming the incoming president and first lady to the White House (with the usual tour of the private quarters, etc., chatting/conversations), no *attending the inauguration, and what do you think the chances will be that the outgoing president leaves a letter in the desk for the incoming president?  :-\  CNN just showed footage of Pres. Trump showing the letter that Pres. Obama had left for him and talked about the thoughtfulness of that letter and that he had thanked Pres. Obama for it.

*first time that this hasn't happened in 150 years

The three times that outgoing presidents haven't attended the incoming president's inauguration in US history:  https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/11/opinions/presidents-history-skipping-inauguration-day-balcerski/index.html
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Brahmsian on January 19, 2021, 07:59:05 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on January 19, 2021, 07:55:08 AM
and what do you think the chances will be that the outgoing president leaves a letter in the desk for the incoming president?  :-\ 

The letter will be written in crayon:

"I won by a landslide, Sleepy Joe!"  ???
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 19, 2021, 09:56:51 AM

     The Senate Repubs are desperately trying to not know very much about how guilty Trump is. That's going to be difficult, as Trump's enjoyment of the insurrection while it was happening and his refusal to provide timely aid to the besieged in the Capitol is ultra damning. If anyone had reasonable doubt about whether Trump intended the consequences of his incitement, the evidence of his behavior during the violence while he watched it on TV removes it. It's a very tall order to not know very much about that.

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 19, 2021, 10:26:30 AM
Quote from: drogulus on January 19, 2021, 09:56:51 AM
     The Senate Repubs are desperately trying to not know very much about how guilty Trump is. That's going to be difficult, as Trump's enjoyment of the insurrection while it was happening and his refusal to provide timely aid to the besieged in the Capitol is ultra damning. If anyone had reasonable doubt about whether Trump intended the consequences of his incitement, the evidence of his behavior during the violence while he watched it on TV removes it. It's a very tall order to not know very much about that.
Perhaps follow this example?
(https://amommasview.files.wordpress.com/2015/02/ostrich-head-in-sand.jpg)

Heard a short time ago that VP Pence may not go to Pres. Trump's big sendoff?  Seems to be uncertain at the moment.  Meanwhile (also heard on CNN), the declines in attending his sendoff by the White House staff are on the rise too.

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on January 19, 2021, 11:56:16 AM
Quote from: drogulus on January 19, 2021, 09:56:51 AM
     The Senate Repubs are desperately trying to not know very much about how guilty Trump is. That's going to be difficult, as Trump's enjoyment of the insurrection while it was happening and his refusal to provide timely aid to the besieged in the Capitol is ultra damning. If anyone had reasonable doubt about whether Trump intended the consequences of his incitement, the evidence of his behavior during the violence while he watched it on TV removes it. It's a very tall order to not know very much about that.

Are they? No. They know. And like Mitch McConnell, they know the impeachment trial is their last chance to save (or destroy) the Republican Party. They're like Frodo standing above the caldera holding the One Ring. They can destroy Trump and be free, preventing him from holding office ever again, or they can succumb and become slaves to his sick mind forever. If they destroy him and lose his base they might lose power for the foreseeable future because the party will split in two. But it must be really tempting to be free of him and consign him forever to talk radio or reality TV. What drama!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 19, 2021, 12:00:38 PM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on January 19, 2021, 10:26:30 AM

Heard a short time ago that VP Pence may not go to Pres. Trump's big sendoff? 

Could Trump's Going Away Ceremony Be a Ghost Town? (https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/01/could-trumps-going-away-ceremony-be-a-ghost-town.html)

[...]"On Sunday night, former White House director of communications Anthony Scaramucci said that even he had been invited to the good-bye party. "Trust me, that had to be a mass email if one of them got sent to me," he told Inside Edition. That Scaramucci got an invite to Trump's final presidential event suggests a wide net of invitations: The financier who was kicked out of the administration in 2017 after ten days for griping on the record about office politics became a vocal Trump critic following the El Paso shooting in 2019, when the president gave a thumbs up in a picture with a baby orphaned in the attack. That Trump — who values loyalty above most everything else — allegedly invited an opportunist who twice violated his allegiance suggests that the White House could be desperate to put bodies in the crowd.

Another concerning sign came from the Wall Street Journal's Rebecca Ballhaus, who reported that "some recipients" on Wednesday's guest list "have been surprised the invite offered them five guests." In the wake of the Capitol riot and his partial sabotage of the effort to secure a Republican Senate majority, and amid reports of an isolated president inside a shrinking inner circle, if Trump is inviting distant ex-staffers and a basketball-starting-lineup's worth of their closest friends, the ceremony could be a quiet one."[...]
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 19, 2021, 12:58:18 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on January 18, 2021, 08:38:07 PM
Pink seesaws across US-Mexico border named Design of the Year 2020 (https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2021/jan/19/pink-seesaws-across-us-mexico-border-named-design-of-the-year-2020)

(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/5a45525ddd598b1f981fd1be938299afe1d7c9b5/0_0_5472_3283/master/5472.jpg?width=620&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=f1c8c039c238178b05cd8143244ae5f4)

Nice!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 19, 2021, 02:10:33 PM
not The Onion:

Trump wants $2bn for biggest presidential library ever (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/trump-wants-2bn-for-biggest-presidential-library-ever-nwsj7pldl)

nor is that a misprint: billion

In my mind a building housing the documents and memos of the Trump administration could only be filed floor to ceiling with bags of shredded paper


(has anyone here ever been to a presidential library?)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on January 19, 2021, 03:01:44 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on January 19, 2021, 02:10:33 PM
not The Onion:

Trump wants $2bn for biggest presidential library ever (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/trump-wants-2bn-for-biggest-presidential-library-ever-nwsj7pldl)

nor is that a misprint: billion

In my mind a building housing the documents and memos of the Trump administration could only be filed floor to ceiling with bags of shredded paper


(has anyone here ever been to a presidential library?)

I met a traveller from an antique land,
Who said—"Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. . . . Near them, on the sand,
Half sunk a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed;
And on the pedestal, these words appear:
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal Wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away."

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 19, 2021, 06:07:44 PM
Haitian boy, 9, detained as Trump's family separation policy pursued to bitter end (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/20/haitian-boy-9-detained-as-trumps-family-separation-policy-pursued-to-bitter-end)

"In the final hours of the Trump presidency, immigration officials detained a nine year-old Haitian boy with a valid US visa, separated him from his elder brother and incarcerated him, according to lawyers and activists.

Vladimir Fardin arrived in San Francisco from Haiti on Sunday, on a tourist visa. He was travelling with his 19-year-old brother, Christian Laporte, who has been studying in Diablo Valley College outside San Francisco, and had a valid student's visa, according to lawyers acting for him.

The two boys had been on a Christmas vacation with their mother in Santo Domingo in the Dominican Republic, and Vladimir was flying back to California with Christian to spend some time with his elder brother and their godmother, who acts as their guardian in the US.

They were detained by border officials at San Francisco airport and held for two days without being allowed to contact family, lawyers or community organisations. On Tuesday morning, they were separated.

Nine-year old Vladimir was sent to a refugee resettlement facility in southern California as an unaccompanied minor, and Christian was deported to Mexico, apparently because that was where their connecting flight from Santo Domingo was from.

As of Tuesday evening, Vladimir had not been allowed to contact, or be contacted by, his family or any support groups.

"We are extremely worried because Vladimir has never spent time alone," Guerline Jozef, the head of the Haitian Bridge Alliance community group, said. "He is nine years old, and his older brother has been extremely protective of him and taking care of him. So, this is beyond cruel."[...]
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 19, 2021, 06:29:32 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on January 19, 2021, 06:07:44 PM
Haitian boy, 9, detained as Trump's family separation policy pursued to bitter end (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/20/haitian-boy-9-detained-as-trumps-family-separation-policy-pursued-to-bitter-end)

"In the final hours of the Trump presidency, immigration officials detained a nine year-old Haitian boy with a valid US visa, separated him from his elder brother and incarcerated him, according to lawyers and activists.

Vladimir Fardin arrived in San Francisco from Haiti on Sunday, on a tourist visa. He was travelling with his 19-year-old brother, Christian Laporte, who has been studying in Diablo Valley College outside San Francisco, and had a valid student's visa, according to lawyers acting for him.

The two boys had been on a Christmas vacation with their mother in Santo Domingo in the Dominican Republic, and Vladimir was flying back to California with Christian to spend some time with his elder brother and their godmother, who acts as their guardian in the US.

They were detained by border officials at San Francisco airport and held for two days without being allowed to contact family, lawyers or community organisations. On Tuesday morning, they were separated.

Nine-year old Vladimir was sent to a refugee resettlement facility in southern California as an unaccompanied minor, and Christian was deported to Mexico, apparently because that was where their connecting flight from Santo Domingo was from.

As of Tuesday evening, Vladimir had not been allowed to contact, or be contacted by, his family or any support groups.

"We are extremely worried because Vladimir has never spent time alone," Guerline Jozef, the head of the Haitian Bridge Alliance community group, said. "He is nine years old, and his older brother has been extremely protective of him and taking care of him. So, this is beyond cruel."[...]

It was always about the cruelty.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 20, 2021, 05:10:37 AM
Well, that was quite the sendoff...and parting speech!   ::)

And it seems that Trump did leave a note for Biden.  Looking forward to hearing what he wrote.

In any event, onward and upward!

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 20, 2021, 07:18:42 AM
     (https://cdn.theatlantic.com/thumbor/uTl9XUgwLU0BUUzNGCIG3hS22MY=/5x5:3865x2184/720x405/media/img/mt/2018/08/RTS1Z0V0/original.jpg)

"Y'know, the thing about a shark, he's got lifeless eyes, black eyes, like a doll's eyes."

     They're black seriously, if not literally.

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 20, 2021, 07:23:20 AM

     (https://explodedgoat.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/BA1.png)

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 20, 2021, 08:40:02 AM
Watching the current footage, of everybody talking after the swearing in and speech, I just hope this isn't going to be the first Biden super spreader event.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 20, 2021, 08:53:10 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 20, 2021, 08:40:02 AM
Watching the current footage, of everybody talking after the swearing in and speech, I just hope this isn't going to be the first Biden super spreader event.
I know...a bit worried about that too; however, I suspect that 99% of the folks attending have been being super-careful.

Wonderful speech by Biden.  Stirring benediction by the Rev. Dr. Silvester Beaman.  And, wow!  What a poem by the twenty-two year old US Poet Laureate!

And so great to see a woman being sworn in as the first female vice president--a first in so many ways.  :)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on January 20, 2021, 09:22:17 AM
And now we close that chapter of the failed, misanthropic presidency of Donald Trump. Good riddance! [Breathes sigh of relief.]
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on January 20, 2021, 09:30:11 AM
Glad that it was only one term for #45, and that today's ceremony went well.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on January 20, 2021, 09:34:44 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on January 20, 2021, 08:53:10 AM
I know...a bit worried about that too; however, I suspect that 99% of the folks attending have been being super-careful.

Wonderful speech by Biden.  Stirring benediction by the Rev. Dr. Silvester Beaman.  And, wow!  What a poem by the twenty-two year old US Poet Laureate!

And so great to see a woman being sworn in as the first female vice president--a first in so many ways.  :)

I liked Biden's speech as well, which is the only thing I actively watched, although I did watch him being sworn in by Chief Justice Roberts. It's time to get to work, though. Biden has so much on his plate right now that I doubt he'll get it all done in four years.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: vandermolen on January 20, 2021, 09:36:38 AM
As an outsider I'm hopeful for the future.

This made me laugh today:

https://www.aol.co.uk/entertainment/2021/01/20/nigella-lawson-names-bitter-orange-tart-recipe-of-the-day-as-tru/
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 20, 2021, 09:48:12 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on January 20, 2021, 09:30:11 AM
Glad that it was only one term for #45, and that today's ceremony went well.
Yes, me too!  Wondering how long they'll keep all those National Guard troops around and praying that there aren't any more violent demonstrations.

Quote from: vandermolen on January 20, 2021, 09:36:38 AM
As an outsider I'm hopeful for the future.

This made me laugh today:

https://www.aol.co.uk/entertainment/2021/01/20/nigella-lawson-names-bitter-orange-tart-recipe-of-the-day-as-tru/
Thanks!  Very witty.  :)

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Brahmsian on January 20, 2021, 09:51:45 AM
Even as an outsider, but a neighbour to the United States, can I just express how relieving and refreshing it is to be able to say "President Biden".
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 20, 2021, 09:53:14 AM
Quote from: OrchestralNut on January 20, 2021, 09:51:45 AM
Even as an outsider, but a neighbour to the United States, can I just express how relieving and refreshing it is to be able to say "President Biden".
+1 from a local.  ;)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on January 20, 2021, 09:56:35 AM
Quote from: OrchestralNut on January 20, 2021, 09:51:45 AM
Even as an outsider, but a neighbour to the United States, can I just express how relieving and refreshing it is to be able to say "President Biden".

I think the entire world is relieved by Trump's departure except for maybe Putin.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 20, 2021, 10:50:17 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on January 20, 2021, 09:56:35 AM
I think the entire world is relieved by Trump's departure except for maybe Putin.

well, there were something like seventy million Americans (some dead, admittedly) who voted for the other guy.

So some folks will need some time yet.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on January 20, 2021, 11:17:19 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 20, 2021, 10:50:17 AM
well, there were something like seventy million Americans (some dead, admittedly) who voted for the other guy.

So some folks will need some time yet.

Yes, but many of these voters didn't know that the former thug-in-chief was going to incite a coup. If they were happy the Capitol got raided by a bunch of toothless vermin, then they don't deserve to vote at all, because they're not Americans, IMHO.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 20, 2021, 11:33:39 AM
I don't know. To a large degree the coup was foretold by Trump when he said, in 2016, he'd accept the election result if he won.

I understand it's hard to believe he's really going to do all these things, but at some point it became clear it was naive to think he'd stop at anything.

But let's say fifty million out of seventy were appalled by the events of Jan 6.

That leaves twenty who were ok with it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on January 20, 2021, 11:41:04 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on January 20, 2021, 11:17:19 AM
Yes, but many of these voters didn't know that the former thug-in-chief was going to incite a coup.

Given the rhetoric Trump used for years and especially during 2020 people should have known he might try to incite a coup.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 20, 2021, 02:37:36 PM
I don't watch inaugurations - including this one - but in today's commentary I heard someone mention a line in Obama's first regarding foreign policy where he said "We will extend a hand if you unclench your fist" and I thought that's a pretty great quote that deserves to have gone into common usage.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: bhodges on January 20, 2021, 03:50:31 PM
Just watched press secretary Jen Psaki give the first White House press conference for the new administration. Zero comparison with what we have had to put up with for the last four years. She promises daily briefings, Monday through Friday. (And if I heard right, she chuckled slightly, referencing time off on weekends.)

Ended with, "Thank you again, everyone. Let's do this again tomorrow!" Incredible.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlhZwCHAxT8

--Bruce
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on January 20, 2021, 04:40:02 PM
Quote from: Herman on January 20, 2021, 11:33:39 AM
I don't know. To a large degree the coup was foretold by Trump when he said, in 2016, he'd accept the election result if he won.

I understand it's hard to believe he's really going to do all these things, but at some point it became clear it was naive to think he'd stop at anything.

But let's say fifty million out of seventy were appalled by the events of Jan 6.

That leaves twenty who were ok with it.

I think it's still a difficult pill for many to swallow that he did what he did at the end of his presidency. I guess I'm an optimist in that I was hoping that a man in his position would've had the balls to admit his own defeat despite what he had said in the past. Remember he has flip-flopped more times than a hooker on meth. The man lost fair and square, so at this juncture, I'm quite content knowing that I don't have to see his orange-glazed dour mug again. I think the best defense against Trump now would be to ignore him and pretend the last four years didn't happen. I know I'm going to try my best to do this.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Que on January 21, 2021, 12:17:53 AM
My congratulations to all members from the US with their new president....  :)

Though I'm afraid we are all in the midst of a fight over a free, open, inclusive and outward looking democratic society. A fight against ethnocentrism, isolationism and authoritarian nationalism. This fight takes on different forms in the US, Europe and the UK, but is IMO essentially the same.

I hope the US and other countries can steer away from this threat to our democracies.
Because we are going to need each other to defend democracy in the world, and to save humanity and the planet from a pandemic and a climate crisis.

Q
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 21, 2021, 01:41:40 AM
It never ceases to puzzle me that the US, arguably a nation based on accessibility of citizenship, has an anthem that is completely unsingable.

Or rather, those who can sing the first part cannot reach the second part, and the other way around.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DaveF on January 21, 2021, 02:01:46 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 21, 2021, 01:41:40 AM
It never ceases to puzzle me that the US, arguably a nation based on accessibility of citizenship, has an anthem that is completely unsingable.

Or rather, those who can sing the first part cannot reach the second part, and the other way around.

And wasn't it Kurt Vonnegut who described the lyrics as "gibberish sprinkled with question-marks"?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on January 21, 2021, 04:21:29 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 21, 2021, 01:41:40 AM
It never ceases to puzzle me that the US, arguably a nation based on accessibility of citizenship, has an anthem that is completely unsingable.

Or rather, those who can sing the first part cannot reach the second part, and the other way around.

There have been "nativist" movements in the USA for the better part of 200 years -- the earliest complaints were about the Irish Catholics.  Subsequently it was about eastern European Catholics and -- of course -- Jews.  Government policy has had its ups & down vis-à-vis immigration:  more often favourble, (for cheap labour), but even then proscribing Asian new-comers much longer than Europeans.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 21, 2021, 04:34:52 AM
Quote from: DaveF on January 21, 2021, 02:01:46 AM
And wasn't it Kurt Vonnegut who described the lyrics as "gibberish sprinkled with question-marks"?

Oh, I think it's quite beautiful and lyrics never make sense (try Pindar). It's just that it's virtually unsingable from start to finish, because of the required vocal reach high and low.

Maybe the effort is part of the pathos.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 21, 2021, 06:05:38 AM
     The Proud Boys are blaming Trump for the failure of the putsch. I don't buy it. You need good followership or leadership is wasted. PBs and their allies didn't succeed at lynching a single congressperson. Pence still crawls the earth. Not everything is the fault of Orange Bad Man.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on January 21, 2021, 06:05:59 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on January 20, 2021, 04:40:02 PM
I think it's still a difficult pill for many to swallow that he did what he did at the end of his presidency. I guess I'm an optimist in that I was hoping that a man in his position would've had the balls to admit his own defeat despite what he had said in the past. Remember he has flip-flopped more times than a hooker on meth. The man lost fair and square, so at this juncture, I'm quite content knowing that I don't have to see his orange-glazed dour mug again. I think the best defense against Trump now would be to ignore him and pretend the last four years didn't happen. I know I'm going to try my best to do this.

I'd say that's an atracive idea but not much of a defense. The ideal solution is a conviction in the impeachment trial with the condition that Trump be ruled ineligible for public office henceforth. It's in everyone's interest, including that of the Republican Party.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 21, 2021, 07:27:37 AM
Quote from: Que on January 21, 2021, 12:17:53 AM
My congratulations to all members from the US with their new president....  :)

Though I'm afraid we are all in the midst of a fight over a free, open, inclusive and outward looking democratic society. A fight against ethnocentrism, isolationism and authoritarian nationalism. This fight takes on different forms in the US, Europe and the UK, but is IMO essentially the same.

I hope the US and other countries can steer away from this threat to our democracies.
Because we are going to need each other to defend democracy in the world, and to save humanity and the planet from a pandemic and a climate crisis.

Q

As one journalist put it, borrowing from Churchill: It's not the end, nor even the beginning of the end, but the beginning of the middle.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on January 21, 2021, 07:46:18 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on January 21, 2021, 06:05:59 AM
I'd say that's an atracive idea but not much of a defense. The ideal solution is a conviction in the impeachment trial with the condition that Trump be ruled ineligible for public office henceforth. It's in everyone's interest, including that of the Republican Party.

I agree that Trump needs to be prosecuted, but my point is this is an egomaniac who craves media attention. The best way to defeat such an attention-grabbing whore such as Trump would be to simply ignore him post-presidency.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Que on January 21, 2021, 08:13:19 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on January 21, 2021, 07:27:37 AM
As one journalist put it, borrowing from Churchill: It's not the end, nor even the beginning of the end, but the beginning of the middle.

Well put!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on January 21, 2021, 09:26:18 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on January 21, 2021, 07:46:18 AM
I agree that Trump needs to be prosecuted, but my point is this is an egomaniac who craves media attention. The best way to defeat such an attention-grabbing whore such as Trump would be to simply ignore him post-presidency.

I'm happy to do my part in the ignoring! :)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on January 21, 2021, 10:17:56 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on January 21, 2021, 07:46:18 AM
I agree that Trump needs to be prosecuted, but my point is this is an egomaniac who craves media attention. The best way to defeat such an attention-grabbing whore such as Trump would be to simply ignore him post-presidency.

I'm afraid that's going to be pretty difficult because we are dealing with a grant master of attention. He will come up with ways to grab attention we normal mortals would have never thought about.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 21, 2021, 10:47:30 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on January 21, 2021, 10:17:56 AM
I'm afraid that's going to be pretty difficult because we are dealing with a grant master of attention. He will come up with ways to grab attention we normal mortals would have never thought about.

The MAGAverse will be his devoted audience, but they have already been shed from the mainstream, and they will suffer natural attrition.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on January 21, 2021, 06:42:39 PM
Quote from: Herman on January 21, 2021, 01:41:40 AM
It never ceases to puzzle me that the US, arguably a nation based on accessibility of citizenship, has an anthem that is completely unsingable.

Or rather, those who can sing the first part cannot reach the second part, and the other way around.

Perhaps its original form as a convivial ode envisaged vocal chords lubrucated with wine?

Wikipedia dive here
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Anacreontic_Song
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on January 21, 2021, 06:55:05 PM
Quote from: Herman on January 21, 2021, 01:41:40 AM
It never ceases to puzzle me that the US, arguably a nation based on accessibility of citizenship, has an anthem that is completely unsingable.

Or rather, those who can sing the first part cannot reach the second part, and the other way around.

3/4.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on January 22, 2021, 04:38:40 AM
Quote from: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on January 21, 2021, 06:55:05 PM
3/4.

Not according to Lady Gaga. ;)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 22, 2021, 05:29:05 AM
Here's How the Impeachment Managers Can Win (https://thebulwark.com/heres-how-the-impeachment-managers-can-win/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 22, 2021, 06:00:41 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on January 22, 2021, 05:29:05 AM
Here's How the Impeachment Managers Can Win (https://thebulwark.com/heres-how-the-impeachment-managers-can-win/)
Thanks for that link Karl.  Thought-provoking article!

Very sad (and angry) to see that the National Guard were (even temporarily) moved to the parking garage (for when they weren't on duty)!  Who the heck thought that that was a good idea?

https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/21/politics/national-guard-capitol/index.html

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on January 22, 2021, 07:30:51 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on January 21, 2021, 10:17:56 AM
I'm afraid that's going to be pretty difficult because we are dealing with a grant master of attention. He will come up with ways to grab attention we normal mortals would have never thought about.

Not from me!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 22, 2021, 04:27:56 PM
This, however, is a show I might just watch:

Senate ends standoff, agrees to start Trump's impeachment trial Feb. 9
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 22, 2021, 04:34:44 PM
The guys at Pod Save America (which I didn't use to care for but have come around to) joked that going forward they're going to have a swear jar for every time they mention Trump not for something important unfolding but just to vent that they'll have to put money into. And while I think that's an excellent idea I can't resist this one:

Ainsley Earhardt Says Donald Trump Works Hard Because He 'Watches Every Show' (https://www.huffpost.com/entry/ainsley-earhardt-donald-trump-watches-every-show_n_6006f3b3c5b62c0057c06586)

"Fox & Friends" co-host Ainsley Earhardt said Tuesday that Donald Trump's ability to stay up late and watch copious amounts of TV news is actually evidence of his work ethic.

"They'll criticize President Trump, but no one can argue, he is a worker," she said, as seen in the clip below. "He doesn't drink alcohol, he stays up late at night, he watches every show, he's working."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 22, 2021, 04:42:00 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on January 22, 2021, 04:27:56 PM
This, however, is a show I might just watch:

Senate ends standoff, agrees to start Trump's impeachment trial Feb. 9

Doug Andres, a spokesman for [Senate Minority Leader Mitch] McConnell, called the agreement "a win for due process and fairness."

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 23, 2021, 05:18:32 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on January 22, 2021, 04:42:00 PM
Doug Andres, a spokesman for [Senate Minority Leader Mitch] McConnell, called the agreement "a win for due process and fairness."
That sounds like a fair deal with (hopefully) Pres. Biden getting all of his cabinet positions filled and progress made in getting the government back up and functioning again.

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 23, 2021, 11:01:25 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/23/trump-considered-installing-loyalist-as-attorney-general-in-push-to-overturn-election.html

Former President Donald Trump earlier this month plotted to oust Jeffrey Rosen as acting attorney general and replace him with a Justice Department lawyer who would aid his efforts to overturn the presidential election results, The New York Times reported Friday.

The plan would have replaced Rosen with Jeffrey Clark, the lawyer who led the Justice Department's civil division. Clark would have then supported Trump's baseless claims of voter fraud and put pressure on Georgia state officials to change the election outcome.

A Justice Department official familiar with the matter confirmed to NBC News the Times' account of Trump's efforts.

Trump's plan ultimately didn't materialize after Justice Department officials agreed during a conference call that they would resign if Rosen was dismissed, according to the Times.

Trump had urged Rosen to appoint special counsels to investigate his allegations of widespread election fraud as well as the voting machine company Dominion, but Rosen refused.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 23, 2021, 11:58:06 AM
Quote from: T. D. on January 23, 2021, 11:01:25 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/23/trump-considered-installing-loyalist-as-attorney-general-in-push-to-overturn-election.html

Former President Donald Trump earlier this month plotted to oust Jeffrey Rosen as acting attorney general and replace him with a Justice Department lawyer who would aid his efforts to overturn the presidential election results, The New York Times reported Friday.

The plan would have replaced Rosen with Jeffrey Clark, the lawyer who led the Justice Department's civil division. Clark would have then supported Trump's baseless claims of voter fraud and put pressure on Georgia state officials to change the election outcome.

A Justice Department official familiar with the matter confirmed to NBC News the Times' account of Trump's efforts.

Trump's plan ultimately didn't materialize after Justice Department officials agreed during a conference call that they would resign if Rosen was dismissed, according to the Times.

Trump had urged Rosen to appoint special counsels to investigate his allegations of widespread election fraud as well as the voting machine company Dominion, but Rosen refused.
What can one say?  ??? :(  >:(
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on January 23, 2021, 01:41:51 PM
Quote from: geralmar on January 23, 2021, 11:51:56 AM
Not all conservatives supported Trump:

(https://i.postimg.cc/J4N7JTzY/BkvpxU3.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

What a vicious thing to say about Paris Hilton.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 23, 2021, 04:17:50 PM
When did the National Review start shying away from Trump?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 23, 2021, 08:25:57 PM
Senate Republican threatens impeachments of past Democratic presidents (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/23/senate-republican-john-cornyn-impeachment-trump-past-democratic-presidents)

"The Texas Republican senator John Cornyn warned on Saturday that Donald Trump's second impeachment could lead to the prosecution of former Democratic presidents if Republicans retake Congress in two years' time.[...]

"If it is a good idea to impeach and try former presidents, what about former Democratic presidents when Republicans get the majority in 2022?" Cornyn, a 19-year veteran of the Senate who last year tried to distance himself from Trump when it seemed his seat was at risk, tweeted at majority leader Chuck Schumer.

"Think about it and let's do what is best for the country."[...]
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on January 23, 2021, 08:34:29 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on January 23, 2021, 08:25:57 PM
Senate Republican threatens impeachments of past Democratic presidents (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/23/senate-republican-john-cornyn-impeachment-trump-past-democratic-presidents)

"The Texas Republican senator John Cornyn warned on Saturday that Donald Trump's second impeachment could lead to the prosecution of former Democratic presidents if Republicans retake Congress in two years' time.[...]

"If it is a good idea to impeach and try former presidents, what about former Democratic presidents when Republicans get the majority in 2022?" Cornyn, a 19-year veteran of the Senate who last year tried to distance himself from Trump when it seemed his seat was at risk, tweeted at majority leader Chuck Schumer.

"Think about it and let's do what is best for the country."[...]

I say bring it on.   We can finally convict that bastard Andrew Johnson!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on January 23, 2021, 08:40:07 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on January 23, 2021, 08:25:57 PM
Senate Republican threatens impeachments of past Democratic presidents (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/23/senate-republican-john-cornyn-impeachment-trump-past-democratic-presidents)

"The Texas Republican senator John Cornyn warned on Saturday that Donald Trump's second impeachment could lead to the prosecution of former Democratic presidents if Republicans retake Congress in two years' time.[...]

"If it is a good idea to impeach and try former presidents, what about former Democratic presidents when Republicans get the majority in 2022?" Cornyn, a 19-year veteran of the Senate who last year tried to distance himself from Trump when it seemed his seat was at risk, tweeted at majority leader Chuck Schumer.

"Think about it and let's do what is best for the country."[...]

The man is bluffing and is full of shit. There is a huge difference in what Bill Clinton did in office, for example, and what Trump did. While I don't condone Clinton lying to the American public about Monica Lewinsky (a Republican plant in the first-place), I think what Trump did was incite an assault on the US government and is without a doubt far worse than anything Clinton, Obama and Carter did when they were in office. Cornyn should be ashamed of himself for even mentioning this because the Republican Party certainly doesn't need any more division than it already has received with Trump's dishonorable departure.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on January 23, 2021, 08:46:23 PM
Quote from: Daverz on January 23, 2021, 08:34:29 PM
I say bring it on.   We can finally convict that bastard Andrew Johnson!

Get the shovels ready! :P
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 23, 2021, 08:53:37 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on January 23, 2021, 08:40:07 PM
The man is bluffing and is full of shit. There is a huge difference in what Bill Clinton did in office, for example, and what Trump did. While I don't condone Clinton lying to the American public about Monica Lewinsky (a Republican plant in the first-place), I think what Trump did was incite an assault on the US government and is without a doubt far worse than anything Clinton, Obama and Carter did when they were in office. Cornyn should be ashamed of himself for even mentioning this because the Republican Party certainly doesn't need any more division than it already has received with Trump's dishonorable departure.

Plus, if covering up your philandering is grounds for impeachment then the historians have uncovered enough to get at least a quarter of them, right up to Bush 41.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 24, 2021, 07:31:12 AM
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-01-24/biden-won-but-fight-for-democracy-remains-too-close-to-call

Recommended if you can read it w/o paywall.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on January 24, 2021, 07:35:34 AM
Quote from: T. D. on January 24, 2021, 07:31:12 AM
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-01-24/biden-won-but-fight-for-democracy-remains-too-close-to-call

Recommended if you can read it w/o paywall.

A good number of such articles are available for free here in Europe at least.

Not sure this has gotten much overall attention, but #45 actually spent a lot of time rehearsing the denial of election results, long before the election itself:

https://www.rawstory.com/trump-election-lies-2649960952/
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on January 24, 2021, 07:18:52 PM
My, my, my how the mighty have fallen:

https://www.youtube.com/v/y59gdN45-E4

If Trump would've conceded the election like a man instead of the snot-nosed adolescent that he showcased front-and-center to the public post-election, then it might have been a lot easier for him. But, oh yeah, he incited a   that downgraded him to 'not even worth spitting on' category that will forever taint him post-presidency. When you burn bridges and, more importantly, treat everyone else like they're beneath you, then you have what's coming to you. It also doesn't help that his inaction about the 'fake COVID' left hundreds of thousands dead also amounts to him being the worse president in US history. Great job! YOU'RE FIRED!!!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on January 24, 2021, 07:37:03 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on January 24, 2021, 07:18:52 PM
My, my, my how the mighty have fallen:

https://www.youtube.com/v/y59gdN45-E4

If Trump would've conceded the election like a man instead of the snot-nosed adolescent that he showcased front-and-center to the public post-election, then it might have been a lot easier for him. But, oh yeah, he incited a chou that downgraded him to 'not even worth spitting on' category that will forever taint him post-presidency. When you burn bridges and, more importantly, treat everyone else like they're beneath you, then you have what's coming to you.

He saw two alternatives: the rest of his years answering suits and indictments and facing eternal humiliation and/or prison time, or gaining lifetime immunity from prosecution by staying in power. So he tried to join the big boys' dictator club with all his idols by staging a coup. It ended like most Trump ventures. The behaving like a man thing was never happening. As e. e. cummings put it: "Trump is an arse upon which everyone has sat except a man."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on January 24, 2021, 07:56:51 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on January 24, 2021, 07:37:03 PM
He saw two alternatives: the rest of his years answering suits and indictments and facing eternal humiliation and/or prison time, or gaining lifetime immunity from prosecution by staying in power. So he tried to join the big boys' dictator club with all his idols by staging a coup. It ended like most Trump ventures. The behaving like a man thing was never happening. As e. e. cummings put it: "Trump is an arse upon which everyone has sat except a man."

Yes, indeed. It's going to be interesting to see what happens February 7th as the Senate has to figure how to vanquish this orange stain from ever running for public office again.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 25, 2021, 04:01:28 AM
Smiley-face lyin' Sarah Huckabee is going to run for Arkansas governor, saying that Washington is now in the hands of the "radical left."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on January 25, 2021, 06:36:39 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 25, 2021, 04:01:28 AM
Smiley-face lyin' Sarah Huckabee is going to run for Arkansas governor, saying that Washington is now in the hands of the "radical left."

She's a moron. Plain and simple.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on January 25, 2021, 07:21:48 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on January 15, 2021, 11:31:26 AM
Those legal steps from Dominion voting systems can be pretty effective.

Here's a another example, just in:
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/01/statement.html

Giuliani now sued for  $ 1.3 billion
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/25/dominion-rudy-giuliani-lawsuit-election
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 25, 2021, 07:34:50 AM
When asked, Giuliani boasted that he did not care how history would view his ignominous wingman-for-Trump senescence.

"When I'm dead, I'm dead," he said, or something to that effect.

It's strange that people did not seem to realize there's a period in between, when Trump is not protecting you anymore (in sofar as he ever did) and you're not dead yet.

Giuliani is about to enter that period.

It's more or less the same with all these Capitol vandalizers who blissfully posted selfie vids online to save law enforcement time tracking them down. They thought they couldn't get hurt.

It seems to be part of Trumpist Derangement Syndrom.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on January 25, 2021, 07:42:07 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 25, 2021, 07:34:50 AM
When asked, Giuliani boasted that he did not care how history would view his ignominous wingman-for-Trump senescence.

"When I'm dead, I'm dead," he said, or something to that effect.

It's strange that people did not seem to realize there's a period in between, when Trump is not protecting you anymore (in sofar as he ever did) and you're not dead yet.

Giuliani is about to enter that period.

It's more or less the same with all these Capitol vandalizers who blissfully posted selfie vids online to save law enforcement time tracking them down. They thought they couldn't get hurt.

It seems to be part of Trumpist Derangement Syndrom.

It'll be nice to see Giuliani get taken down to size. I'll get the popcorn ready.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on January 25, 2021, 07:43:47 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 25, 2021, 07:34:50 AM
When asked, Giuliani boasted that he did not care how history would view his ignominous wingman-for-Trump senescence.

"When I'm dead, I'm dead," he said, or something to that effect.

It's strange that people did not seem to realize there's a period in between, when Trump is not protecting you anymore (in sofar as he ever did) and you're not dead yet.

Giuliani is about to enter that period.

It's more or less the same with all these Capitol vandalizers who blissfully posted selfie vids online to save law enforcement time tracking them down. They thought they couldn't get hurt.

It seems to be part of Trumpist Derangement Syndrom.

For $ 1.3 billion, one could have enjoyed quite a few CDs ...

But it's perhaps one of those instances where the compensation amount seems less inflated, than in some cases.
Dominion got $ 120 mio in US deals during 2017-2019
https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamandrzejewski/2020/12/08/dominion-voting-systems-received-120-million-from-19-states-and-133-local-governments-to-provide-election-services-2017-2019/

Perhaps his best defense will be senility and health problems.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on January 25, 2021, 07:57:09 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 25, 2021, 04:01:28 AM
Smiley-face lyin' Sarah Huckabee is going to run for Arkansas governor, saying that Washington is now in the hands of the "radical left."

Corporate Dems (majority of the Dems): Not left at all. Center or right of center. However, they are somewhat radical in ignoring the wishes of their base massively.

Progressive Dems
(minority of the Dems): Yes, they are left, but not that radical. It's not radical to give healthcare to everyone (denying healthcare from millions IS really radical!).

The Republicans: Very radical and extremely right.

If anything, Washington has been in the hands of the "radical right" for decades. If Sarah Huckabee were right, we would be in the middle of the process of nationalization of Aetna and Big Pharma. Is that what's happening Sarah Huckabee? I didn't think so. Instead there's not even vote on medicare for all on the house floor! In the hands of the "radical left" my ass!  ::)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 25, 2021, 08:37:38 AM
Supreme Court dismisses emoluments cases against Trump.   >:(

The court instructed the lower courts to wipe away previous lower court opinions that went against Trump because he is no longer in office. It leaves unresolved a novel question raised in the case because Trump, unlike other presidents, did not use a blind trust when he assumed the presidency, but instead continued to retain an interest in his businesses and let those businesses to take money from foreign and domestic governments.

The order was issued without comment or dissent.


https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/25/politics/emoluments-supreme-court-donald-trump-case/index.html
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 25, 2021, 09:12:11 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on January 25, 2021, 08:37:38 AM
Supreme Court dismisses emoluments cases against Trump.   >:(

The court instructed the lower courts to wipe away previous lower court opinions that went against Trump because he is no longer in office. It leaves unresolved a novel question raised in the case because Trump, unlike other presidents, did not use a blind trust when he assumed the presidency, but instead continued to retain an interest in his businesses and let those businesses to take money from foreign and domestic governments.

The order was issued without comment or dissent.


This SCOTUS decision could have far reaching consequences.

First Trump can't be charged because he's president.
Next he can't be charged because he's no longer president.
This is what all Republicans are going to say in an Impeachment trial, with the exception of Romney.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 25, 2021, 09:28:03 AM
The SCOTUS dismissal of the emoluments case had been widely anticipated.

I read an article citing scholar Laurence Tribe to that effect months ago. Basically, the emoluments clause can only be invoked while the accused President is in office. Once gone, home free. Congress should have addressed the issue years ago, while Cheeto Mussolini was in office (yeah, right).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 25, 2021, 09:33:38 AM
Quote from: T. D. on January 25, 2021, 09:28:03 AM
The SCOTUS dismissal of the emoluments case had been widely anticipated.

I read an article citing scholar Laurence Tribe to that effect months ago. Basically, the emoluments clause can only be invoked while the accused President is in office. Once gone, home free. Congress should have addressed the issue years ago, while Cheeto Mussolini was in office (yeah, right).
Bummer (to put it politely)!

Heard or read about a week ago(?) that as he was leaving the office that Trump changed the rules about not being able to profit from the office (believe that it used to be for a 5 year period?).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 25, 2021, 09:37:19 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on January 25, 2021, 09:33:38 AM
Bummer (to put it politely)!

Heard or read about a week ago(?) that as he was leaving the office that Trump changed the rules about not being able to profit from the office (believe that it used to be for a 5 year period?).

This is an article I believe I posted here in October:

https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2020-trump-faces-lawsuits-and-legal-threats/

If Trump loses

Trump will probably not have to worry about these [emoluments] cases. The goal of the suits was to force him to fully divest himself from his businesses while in office. But that will no longer be a relevant concern if Trump loses in November, and violations of the emoluments clauses do not carry any other financial penalties. "There's no longer any remedy that could be issued," Tribe says. "It's unfortunate but likely that the emoluments cases will be dismissed."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 25, 2021, 09:44:26 AM
Quote from: T. D. on January 25, 2021, 09:37:19 AM
This is an article I believe I posted here in October:

https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2020-trump-faces-lawsuits-and-legal-threats/

If Trump loses

Trump will probably not have to worry about these [emoluments] cases. The goal of the suits was to force him to fully divest himself from his businesses while in office. But that will no longer be a relevant concern if Trump loses in November, and violations of the emoluments clauses do not carry any other financial penalties. "There's no longer any remedy that could be issued," Tribe says. "It's unfortunate but likely that the emoluments cases will be dismissed."

Thanks for the information. 

But violations don't carry "any other financial penalties"?  What penalties could he have incurred if found guilty?

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 25, 2021, 10:02:06 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on January 25, 2021, 09:44:26 AM
Thanks for the information. 

But violations don't carry "any other financial penalties"?  What penalties could he have incurred if found guilty?

PD

Dunno, sorry. I didn't follow the story carefully enough to have researched fine points, and given that it's a dead issue, I surely won't now.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 25, 2021, 10:26:53 AM
Quote from: T. D. on January 25, 2021, 10:02:06 AM
Dunno, sorry. I didn't follow the story carefully enough to have researched fine points, and given that it's a dead issue, I surely won't now.
Thanks anyway.

I did find this article to be interesting.  Note:  It's from 2016.  https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/constitution-check-can-a-violation-of-the-emoluments-clause-be-proven/

Constitution Check: Can a violation of the Emoluments Clause be proven?

Lyle Denniston, Constitution Daily's Supreme Court correspondent, says that unanswered constitutional questions about the president's acceptance of financial gifts or things of value from foreign governments might reside in the White House itself.

800px-West_side_of_the_White_House_Executive_ResidenceTHE STATEMENT AT ISSUE:

"It is possible that many transactions between foreign states and the Trump empire would involve no actual impropriety, but it is a virtual certainty that many would create the risk of divided or blurred loyalties that the Emoluments Clause was enacted to prohibit.  And while

in some instances the threat might be readily apparent, the majority of potential conflicts would be cloaked in secrecy, buried in technicalities, or impossible to prove definitively.  That is true both because Mr. Trump has declined to make many of his business dealings transparent, and because any president often acts overtly and on the basis of extremely complicated motives.  Disentangling any potential improper influence resulting from special treatment of Mr. Trump's business holdings by foreign states would be extremely difficult, at best.  The American people would be condemned to uncertainty and innuendo, and our political discourse would be rife with unresolved and unresolvable accusations of corruption."

– Excerpt from a Brookings Institution white paper, issued December 16, on the Constitution's Emoluments Clause, by two former White House ethics lawyers -- Norman J. Eisen and Richard W. Painter -- and Harvard law professor Laurence H. Tribe.

WE CHECKED THE CONSTITUTION, AND...

The founding generation was entirely familiar with a common practice among European royalty of doling out favors – financial and otherwise – to influence other governments.  In writing the Constitution, that generation sought to make sure that this did not happen in the new American government.  That is why they included the Emoluments Clause, barring foreign government gifts or anything of value to any officer of the U.S. government – unless Congress consented.

America is getting reacquainted with that Clause, in the broad debate now unfolding over how President-elect Donald Trump will separate himself – if he will – from his far-flung business interests in the Trump Organization.  Three central questions have tended to dominate that debate: first, will Trump actually violate the Clause; second, if he is suspected of doing so, how will that be proved, and, third, who would enforce the Clause?

There is little history surrounding the Clause since it was inserted in the original Constitution in 1787, but what history there is suggests quite strongly that it would mainly be up to Congress to enforce its restriction on foreign largesse for an American president or other federal officials.  And it also suggests that most of the time a president or other official initiates an inquiry to Congress about whether it will consent to accepting and keeping a particular valuable item.  In 1833, for example, President Andrew Jackson asked Congress if he could keep a gold medal given to him by a foreign government, and Congress said no.

But what if no inquiry is sent to Congress?  Then, it seems, a discovery of a potential violation would depend upon the diligence of the lawmakers in monitoring how a president who also has extensive financial interests deals with foreign governments.  If Congress is controlled by the same political party as the White House, what would the incentive be to engage in such 1monitoring?  Perhaps only if potential violations otherwise became public knowledge might the lawmakers take notice.

If Congress did take notice, it could veto the gift or other thing of value, but its only real enforcement power – aside from potential adverse publicity -- is the awesome authority to impeach a president.

There is considerable debate about the availability of another potential enforcement mechanism – that is, can any private citizen or private business (say, a competitor) sue?  That would have to be tested, to be sure.

But, as the quotation above from the new Brookings Institution analysis illustrates, the biggest uncertainty about enforcing the Emoluments Clause is the question of proof of a violation.  In the situation of a president who also is a business executive with wide holdings, and particularly one who does not make a full public disclosure of the extent and detail of those holdings, how can it be shown that the business benefited from a forbidden favor – and, in turn, how to show that the president benefitted?

Thus, the first question to be raised in monitoring what a President Trump might be doing that could raise concerns under the Emoluments Clause is how to find out when an arm of his business had dealings with a foreign government.  How could that be probed by, say, investigative journalists?  What kind of public reports, if any, might be revealing?  Would the foreign government talk publicly about such a transaction?

The business, of course, would have to file U.S. tax returns, but would the Internal Revenue Service have any authority to investigate a potential violation of the Emoluments Clause?  That is highly doubtful, especially if the company's revenues from abroad appeared to be, or actually were, the result of normal business deals.

And, even a gesture as simple as a payment of money by a foreign government to one branch of the president's business empire may get complicated by issues of motive – on both sides of the transaction – and benefit.  If the payment were for goods or services of a normal kind, and the money was paid at usual market rates, what effect might that have on the business entity's revenues, its profits, and the ongoing value of the business?  Indeed, are profits for a business owned by a president even covered by the Emoluments Clause?

If the Emoluments Clause is thought of, fundamentally, as a check upon outright bribery or blatant favoritism, why would foreign actions in the normal course of business be a violation?  And, even if the motive of the foreign donor were suspect, is the American business responsible, legally, for that?

What seems clear from even a cursory analysis of the constitutional problem is that fidelity to the Emoluments Clause may ultimately depend upon the good faith of the president as a businessman.  The Constitution places enormous trust in the occupant of the White House and, in doing so, expresses an aspiration that the trust will not be abused.

Legendary journalist Lyle Denniston is Constitution Daily's Supreme Court correspondent. Denniston has written for us as a contributor since June 2011 and he has covered the Supreme Court since 1958. His work also appears on lyldenlawnews.com.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 25, 2021, 11:59:34 AM
I found this to be rather amusing.  It's one of the headlines and link to an article currently on the main page of CNN's website.  :D

SCOUTS dismisses emoluments cases against Trump.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 27, 2021, 05:12:59 PM
Quote from: geralmar on January 27, 2021, 04:23:38 PM
The emoluments cases didn't reach the Supreme Court until Trump was out of office only because his lawyers deliberately used every delaying tactic they could to assure the cases would not reach the Court until he WAS out of office.  Like deliberately running out the statute of limitations.  The Supreme Court just didn't want to take the cases.

The whole team is all about obstruction of justice.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 27, 2021, 11:25:42 PM
Evading justice by delay, counter-sue and settle has been Trump's m.o. for his entire adult life.

However, what's more concerning is that clearly the GOP and the judicial apparatus they have put in place has in the interval since Jan 6 decided that Biden c.s. are not going to get anything done; the GOP is going to continue its hold on power via every means possible.

There is not going to be an impeachment conviction (Romney and Murkowski are going to be the only ones voting for, and they'll be hounded out of office, if not straight up assassinated); there aren't going to be successful court cases (see above) and Trump is going to rule from Mar a Lago.

I say this without any pleasure, but it looks like the USA is kaputt.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 27, 2021, 11:47:59 PM
Quote from: Herman on January 27, 2021, 11:25:42 PM
Evading justice by delay, counter-sue and settle has been Trump's m.o. for his entire adult life.

However, what's more concerning is that clearly the GOP and the judicial apparatus they have put in place has in the interval since Jan 6 decided that Biden c.s. are not going to get anything done; the GOP is going to continue its hold on power via every means possible.

There is not going to be an impeachment conviction (Romney and Murkowski are going to be the only ones voting for, and they'll be hounded out of office, if not straight up assassinated); there aren't going to be successful court cases (see above) and Trump is going to rule from Mar a Lago.

I say this without any pleasure, but it looks like the USA is kaputt.

I'm not seeing that, Either of those.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on January 28, 2021, 02:00:18 AM
Quote from: Herman on January 27, 2021, 11:25:42 PM
I say this without any pleasure, but it looks like the USA is kaputt.

Intellectually yes. Somehow I am even more depressed/sad about what's happening in the US now that Trump has gone. Trump was just one man, one lunatic. Now that he is off the limelights, his lunatic followers and other crazy people show up.

What I fear is social media keeps dividing people into bubbles of insanity in ALL countries in the World and a few decades from now everyone's kaputt. The civilization is kaputt. Too large percentage of people just don't have adequate skills in critical thinking to be immune to the rabbit holes of social media. I don't know why this is, but it's how it is. It's the same as a lot of people going insane if they get rich fast. We who do have critical thinking skills and are immune to the crazy conspiracy theories etc. nonsense brainwashing people can only watch helplessly how the amount of insane people grows and grows...

The US is a warning to other countries. You have to teach critical thinking skills in school. You have to protect democracy. You have to uphold humanism. You have to have a vision and work for it in society. Don't cencor social media. Instead, teach people to filter out lunacy.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on January 28, 2021, 05:32:13 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on January 28, 2021, 02:00:18 AM
You have to teach critical thinking skills in school.

That unfortunately doesn't work.  I know people that very much can think critically, but they are inundated with a constant stream of speculation, opinions and misinformation through certain news networks and social media and they become brainwashed to that perspective without realizing it.  And it occurs on both sides of the political spectrum.  Highly educated, intelligent people seem to be MORE susceptible to this and not less.  The only cure is face to face conversation with people that think differently from you.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 28, 2021, 06:01:13 AM
Quote from: DavidW on January 28, 2021, 05:32:13 AM
That unfortunately doesn't work.  I know people that very much can think critically, but they are inundated with a constant stream of speculation, opinions and misinformation through certain news networks and social media and they become brainwashed to that perspective without realizing it.  And it occurs on both sides of the political spectrum.  Highly educated, intelligent people seem to be MORE susceptible to this and not less.  The only cure is face to face conversation with people that think differently from you.

Very good.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on January 28, 2021, 06:58:25 AM
Quote from: DavidW on January 28, 2021, 05:32:13 AM
That unfortunately doesn't work.  I know people that very much can think critically, but they are inundated with a constant stream of speculation, opinions and misinformation through certain news networks and social media and they become brainwashed to that perspective without realizing it.  And it occurs on both sides of the political spectrum.  Highly educated, intelligent people seem to be MORE susceptible to this and not less.  The only cure is face to face conversation with people that think differently from you.

It is endemic and central on one side of the spectrum and a marginal issue on the other. Your both sidism is a delusion. The problem isn't people who think differently, it's a whole segment of the population who refuses to think because they are unable to admit even to themselves the motivations behind their actions and public statements. For a large segment of the Trump base it's racism and fear of changing demographics to the core, which they cannot allow themselves to acknowledge. And do you think the Qanon people really believe that nonsense? Of course they don't. Their identification with these ideas has nothing to do with thinking or belief in any serious adult sense. It's a fantasy game they're pretending is real in a kind of childish regression because this allows them to sublimate and focus their most shameful and irrational impulses outward rather than having to confront the real issues in their lives and their true fears.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 28, 2021, 07:48:10 AM
Insofar as I have a problem in this wise (and maybe I do) it isn't because I don't have tète-á-tètes with QAnon-oids.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 28, 2021, 07:50:29 AM
Quote from: DavidW on January 28, 2021, 05:32:13 AM
That unfortunately doesn't work.  [...]  Highly educated, intelligent people seem to be MORE susceptible to this and not less.  The only cure is face to face conversation with people that think differently from you.

Yes, strange isn't it? People are using enormous amounts of brainpower to be right in the wrong way. (Disagree about the bothsideism)

Obviously the pandemic is very bad for this; people get even more isolated and more susceptible for fear and anxiety.

The Guardian writes that groups of Covid Hoaxers are invading hospitals to shout "covid is a hoax" outside ICUs where people are dying. I want to call this so insanely awful that it's like the Medieval St Vitus Dance craze, but I don't want to say bad things about the medieval age.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on January 28, 2021, 08:19:19 AM


     (https://i.imgur.com/csoPWJ1.jpg)

     

     It's a mistake to think there can be a neutral point between a disease and it's cure. Should we try to understand what the virus wants from us in the name of unity? Should we move on?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 28, 2021, 11:56:23 AM
'My Antifa Lover': I read the weirdest Trump-era erotica so you don't have to
The Trump years were a powerful creative muse for self-published erotic and romance literature. We review four of the most memorable (https://www.theguardian.com/books/2021/jan/28/erotica-fan-fiction-for-the-trump-era-chuck-tingle-jessica-stranger)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 28, 2021, 07:13:46 PM
I pass
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 29, 2021, 04:23:34 AM
I felt sick to my stomach when I heard about Sen. McCarthy going down to Florida to visit Trump--particularly after his turnabout from condemning Trump's actions.

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 29, 2021, 06:14:43 AM
Giuliani's Loopy Voter Fraud Witness Says She's Running For Michigan House Seat
Mellissa Carone, who went viral for her bizarre and discredited testimony last month, now plans to run for a seat that may not exist after redistricting. (https://www.huffpost.com/entry/mellissa-carone-running-michigan-house_n_60119813c5b6a08142739682)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 29, 2021, 08:00:09 AM
Excited to learn that the authors of the excellent "Shattered: Inside Hillary Clinton's Doomed Campaign" - an all-access and highly critical near oral history of the 2016 Clinton campaign - are about to bring out a new book "Lucky: How Joe Biden Barely Won the Presidency" based on the same level of access.

(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/413L2B+A08L.jpg)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 30, 2021, 03:52:07 PM
Quote from: geralmar on January 30, 2021, 03:24:53 PM
Seven million votes hardly qualifies as "barely".

I doubt that's what they're getting at with "barely". I suspect its more to do with the unfathomably high number who still voted for him after everything, and if he'd just done a little that was positive on covid or just gotten out of tje way of the experts and he'd done just a little of, say, infrastructure then that little might have won him a second term, all other sins forgiven. it may also refer to the ways the Ds undermine their own messaging.

Really: Shattered was excellent, I'll be ordering the new one tomorrow.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on January 30, 2021, 04:18:28 PM
Even Mitch McConnell called it as an unequivocal landslide victory so yeah it is not barely.  This has to be called out because of the dangerous use of language these times. Just look at "storming the capitol" which romanticizes what happened. The "steal the election" rhetoric is incredibly Orwellian. It is scary how outright lies become acceptable and promoted.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 30, 2021, 04:38:12 PM
(Shrug) I'll read the book and let you know.

If it's following the model of Shattered it's going to be focused on the behind the scenes decisions made during the campaign , both the good and the bad and who made those decisions and why..
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on January 31, 2021, 04:58:51 AM
Quote from: DavidW on January 30, 2021, 04:18:28 PM
Even Mitch McConnell called it as an unequivocal landslide victory so yeah it is not barely.  This has to be called out because of the dangerous use of language these times. Just look at "storming the capitol" which romanticizes what happened. The "steal the election" rhetoric is incredibly Orwellian. It is scary how outright lies become acceptable and promoted.

It's appalling when people prefer lies they want to believe over uncomfortable truths.  This is what has happened in case of 30-40% of the US electorate.

Why?

Whether rational or not, the majority of that minority believe the USA they believed in has left them behind, and they feel disposed of what they believe is their birthright.  (Again, this what they believe whether justified or not.)  They believe the Democratic Party have abandoned and disowned them.  They feel that Democrat elites now care only about Blacks and other minorities, and listen only to academic elites and liberal-control media.

Do they have a case?  Well what is a fact is that the median income in the USA, (and not only the USA come to that), has stagnated while ALL wealth increases have gone to the top 10% and most of that to the top 1% and most of that to the top .01%.  This is due global trends such as automation, (the main culprit), and globalization of the workforces;  in the case of the USA at least, it has been exacerbated by "trickle-down" policies of the last 40 years, especially on taxation, that have systematically favoured the rich.  While the Republican Party is the author of trickle-down, (a.k.a. supply-side), the Democrats have achieved very little to reverse it.

Ironic as it obviously is, this minority have rejected progressive measures such as universal healthcare, free education, etc., that tend to come from Democrats.  And there's the problem:  these folks would rather listen to lies coming from the alt-Right that pander to their fond myths and prejudices than understand what is in their own best interests.

With this as the reality can there really be any hope?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on January 31, 2021, 08:50:16 AM
Quote from: geralmar on January 30, 2021, 03:41:22 PM
(https://i.postimg.cc/sDHRv9WH/144138357-4230935940330720-8964363046292903276-n.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
(https://thesawmillgrill.com/)
I feel for him and his family.  :( >:(

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on February 01, 2021, 07:47:26 AM
Trump is having a hard time hanging onto his legal defense team.  Interesting to read about who his replacements are:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/31/donald-trumps-impeachment-defence-in-disarray-as-lead-lawyers-quit-reports

And from what I understand, Trump's lawyers are supposed to submit their defense memo/strategy tomorrow.

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 01, 2021, 12:06:12 PM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on February 01, 2021, 07:47:26 AM
Trump is having a hard time hanging onto his legal defense team.  Interesting to read about who his replacements are:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/31/donald-trumps-impeachment-defence-in-disarray-as-lead-lawyers-quit-reports (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/31/donald-trumps-impeachment-defence-in-disarray-as-lead-lawyers-quit-reports)

And from what I understand, Trump's lawyers are supposed to submit their defense memo/strategy tomorrow.

PD

He ought to have had comparable difficulty with his frivolous court challenges to the election results ....
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on February 01, 2021, 12:18:02 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 01, 2021, 12:06:12 PM
He ought to have had comparable difficulty with his frivolous court challenges to the election results ....
That would have been nice!!

Interesting too to hear over the course of the past two days as to what some of the news commentators think might be possible reasons as to why the last round of lawyers abandoned him!  ::)

And the new ones:  David Schoen who represented Roger Stone and also met with Jeffrey Epstein (don't know whether or not he agreed to represent him to be fair); Bruce Castor...well, see The Guardian article. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on February 01, 2021, 04:08:17 PM
Well at least you're willing to say that he did indeed win.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 01, 2021, 05:04:42 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on February 01, 2021, 04:08:17 PM
Well at least you're willing to say that he did indeed win.

"Meets Low Expectations"
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on February 01, 2021, 11:44:47 PM
Interesting view, that California voters somehow aren't real voters.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on February 02, 2021, 12:34:55 AM
Quote from: Herman on February 01, 2021, 11:44:47 PM
Interesting view, that California voters somehow aren't real voters.

They are illegal immigrants, cannibalistic satan worshippers, globalist jews, communists and pedophiles. Many of them even believe in science.  ::)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on February 02, 2021, 04:35:58 AM
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-republicans-exclusive/exclusive-dozens-of-former-bush-officials-leave-republican-party-calling-it-trump-cult-idUSKBN2A1275
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on February 02, 2021, 06:24:35 AM
Quote from: T. D. on February 02, 2021, 04:35:58 AM
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-republicans-exclusive/exclusive-dozens-of-former-bush-officials-leave-republican-party-calling-it-trump-cult-idUSKBN2A1275
I had heard that some Republicans were leaving the party, but still surprised at the number.  I wonder whether or not part of the reason that at least some of them are leaving has to do with concerns for their safety and the safety of their families?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on February 02, 2021, 06:33:41 AM
Quote from: Dowder on February 02, 2021, 06:26:30 AM
What a clumsy coup that was, if one was even attempted.

Five people died.

Part of the dance Trump adherents heep doing is saying, every time, but he failed in his plans, so it's no big deal.

That's what grade school kids say.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on February 02, 2021, 09:12:36 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on February 02, 2021, 07:28:54 AM
What do you mean is the dude with the horns for real? Why do you single him out? His delusions aren't any more absurd than those of the rest of the mob or indeed your average Trump supporter. Three years ago I and many others said that a coup was exactly what Trump would attempt when he lost the next election. Those like yourself with no ability to judge character scoffed and said we were suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome. Turns out we were right and you were clueless. So I guess we can reassess TDS: It's a syndrome suffered by rubes who can't tell a con man when they see one and who still talk BS like BLM people being behind the coup long after they should have realized they're suffering from delusions.

Basil, you are telling us like it is.  It's been obvious for decades that Trump is a con-man.

It was and is incomprehensible me to be how so many US voters could be duped by his lies that he could ever have been elected.  I said months before the election that Trump's narcissistic personality disorder would make it impossible -- even in his own mind -- for him to accept defeat and rejection by US voters.

Trump is a POTUS who should live forever in ignominy.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on February 02, 2021, 11:40:56 AM
You all must read this account of a meeting from December when Trump was considering impounding Dominion voting machines and calling in the military to keep himself in power. It's freaking hilarious:


https://www.axios.com/trump-oval-office-meeting-sidney-powell-a8e1e466-2e42-42d0-9cf1-26eb267f8723.html
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 02, 2021, 11:55:02 AM
Quote from: Handelian on February 02, 2021, 10:11:01 AM
It's obvious to us over here who are not duped by the media hype that Biden is a con-man, with 78 years experience, so what's new?

The valley of false equivalence.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on February 02, 2021, 11:57:04 AM
Quote from: Handelian on February 02, 2021, 10:11:01 AM
It's obvious to us over here who are not duped by the media hype that Biden is a con-man, with 78 years experience, so what's new?

Ha!  Sure, Biden is a typical politician, notwithstanding that he is a several orders of magnitude less of a con-man than Trump.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on February 02, 2021, 03:11:17 PM
Quote from: Dowder on February 02, 2021, 02:33:06 PM

What an insurrection it was, too. Trump munched on cheeseburgers while a few of his supporters stormed the capitol only to be quickly rebuffed. Bull horn guy took photos and the press ate it up. Not much of a coup. One guy died after accidentally stun gunning his balls.


No. You came very close to having dead or hostage congress members. Remarkably close. Focus less on shaman guy and more on the bodyarmour and ziptie handcuff guys. And on the people chanting hang Mike Pence and on camera inside the building calling for the death of Nancy Pelosi. And on all the many people now saying they were only following the presidents orders. And on what people trying to take down the US flag and replace it with a Trump flag says. Or what a Trump mob beating a policeman with the pole of a US flag says. And all these people are still living with death threats and ongoing fear of attack from the Trump base.

This whitewashing and diminishing you're following is as dangerous as all the other misinformation of the Trump era.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on February 02, 2021, 03:43:23 PM
Quote from: Dowder on February 02, 2021, 03:30:23 PM
Did Trump say to kill people? I missed that.


Trump has practiced five (more, even) years of stochastic terrorism: you rile people up so much and fill them with so much grievance and hatered that you know its going to explode but you don't know where and you don't much care, all the while keeping your rhetoric to the plausible deniable fig-leafs of "second amendment solutions" or "stand down and stand by". But since the election Trump's twitter feed was a constant call for "revoution" - using that word over and over.

Or to put it another way: do you blame an America-hating Imam for the terrorism of his followers if he never specifically say "do this thing at exactly this time" but did rile them up to the point of action? Or do you think he bares no responsibility?

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on February 02, 2021, 04:39:44 PM
Calling for investigations where there was ample evidence vs. Calling for revolution where there was no evidence.

This is in no way " both sides do it". There is no elected official on the D side supporting domestic terrorism or dangerous conspiracy theories.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 02, 2021, 05:04:19 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on February 02, 2021, 03:43:23 PM
Trump has practiced five (more, even) years of stochastic terrorism: you rile people up so much and fill them with so much grievance and hatered that you know its going to explode but you don't know where and you don't much care, all the while keeping your rhetoric to the plausible deniable fig-leafs of "second amendment solutions" or "stand down and stand by". But since the election Trump's twitter feed was a constant call for "revoution" - using that word over and over.

Or to put it another way: do you blame an America-hating Imam for the terrorism of his followers if he never specifically say "do this thing at exactly this time" but did rile them up to the point of action? Or do you think he bares no responsibility?



Just a note that the troll's gonna troll, he cannot do otherwise.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on February 03, 2021, 01:44:56 AM
Dowder's ban is over? Fortunately I am "done" with US politics, at least on the level I was interested of it during the last 4 years. I'm not going to spend my next four years on following closely Biden's establishment friendly status quo managing...  :P
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on February 03, 2021, 03:28:29 AM
I'm glad some Tumpers are still here carrying the clown banner. I notice some are conspicuously absent since the insurrection. 🤔
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on February 03, 2021, 03:57:17 AM
Quote from: Dowder on February 02, 2021, 04:27:07 PM
Simon, both sides have engaged in this behavior. The Left riled its base up during the Trump presidency and wouldn't let go of Russian interference, Russian collusion, treason with Russia, etc. Also, don't forget this from the last Dem nominee:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1238156
He would only be responsible for telling them to kill, incite, overthrow, etc. Stirring people up isn't a crime. Look at the MSM last year regarding their coverage of George Floyd's death and the others who died at the hands of the police. Should CNN or the other networks be liable for the shitstorm that erupted?

The Mueller Report, which you obviously still haven't read, established collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian operatives as well as laying out ten clear and prosecutable instances of obstruction of justice. Mueller is a republican.

The "shitstorm" was caused by murderous cops, systemic racism in policing, and a racist a$$hole in the White house who actively fomented violence by ordering illegal paramilitary incursions in US cities.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on February 03, 2021, 04:33:41 AM
Quote from: milk on February 03, 2021, 03:28:29 AM
I'm glad some Tumpers are still here carrying the clown banner. I notice some are conspicuously absent since the insurrection. 🤔

The ignore list is my friend.  :D All of those you allude to have resided there since my very first few days on the forum.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on February 03, 2021, 05:36:34 AM
Quote from: T. D. on February 03, 2021, 04:33:41 AM
The ignore list is my friend.  :D All of those you allude to have resided there since my very first few days on the forum.
I've been on the unpopular side of some arguments here and I generally like people I disagree with. But Donald Trump is just going too far!   
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on February 03, 2021, 05:54:25 AM
Quote from: Dowder on February 02, 2021, 04:27:07 PM
He {Trump} would only be responsible for {inciting insurrection by} telling them to kill, incite, overthrow, etc. Stirring people up isn't a crime. Look at the MSM last year regarding their coverage of George Floyd's death and the others who died at the hands of the police. Should CNN or the other networks be liable for the shitstorm that erupted?

I'm sure there will be many a Republican lickspittle Senator who will agree with that, but the fact is that on January 6th Trump when well beyond "stirring up".
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on February 03, 2021, 08:08:38 AM
https://thebulwark.com/democrats-must-run-against-gop-extremism/

The Republicans have become a party of lies, hysteria, extremism, and violence. They must be forced to confront that reality.


In 2020, Democrats won the presidency, the Senate, and the House of Representatives—narrowly. No matter how successfully Democrats govern, Republicans could reclaim Congress in 2022; in 2024, the White House.

The Electoral College, the Senate, and—through gerrymandering—the House are structured to empower a minority of voters. To amplify their influence, Republicans have conjured bogus election fraud to justify systematic voter suppression. Now they are attempting to operationalize their "big lie" that massive fraud defeated Donald Trump—introducing (as of last week) 106 laws in 28 states to limit voter access.

To combat this, Democrats must expand their popular majority. That means spurring America's recovery, registering more voters—and defining the GOP as what it has become: the party of lies, hysteria, extremism, and violence.

Since the deadly attack on Congress, Republicans can no longer hide the costs of breeding mass insanity. Democrats must seize the chance to split the GOP while convincing a crucial share of the electorate that the party is terminally toxic.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on February 03, 2021, 08:49:55 AM
Quote from: milk on February 03, 2021, 03:28:29 AM
I'm glad some Tumpers are still here carrying the clown banner. I notice some are conspicuously absent since the insurrection. 🤔

I can understand how people thought Trump might be a good (read: better than Hillary) choice in 2016, but if Trump's four lunatic years in the White House didn't make them realize their mistakes, why would the insurrection? If you are totally ignorant/brainwashed by lunatic conspiracy theories and you do nothing to change that by educating yourself, you will do/say/write very ignorant things. Hence clown banners.  :P
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 03, 2021, 08:54:05 AM
Trump is really the only candidate for the incurably whacked-out.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on February 03, 2021, 08:59:19 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 03, 2021, 08:54:05 AM
Trump is really the only candidate for the incurably whacked-out.

Or should we say was the only one? He opened the doors for "Alex Jones politicians" such as Marjorie Taylor Greene.  :P
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on February 03, 2021, 09:53:42 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 03, 2021, 08:54:05 AM
Trump is really the only candidate for the incurably whacked-out.
I found this story/interview with a South Carolina mom leaving QAnon (and how she became interested in them to begin with) to be quite interesting:

https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/03/tech/qanon-mom-former-believer/index.html
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on February 03, 2021, 11:15:37 AM
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-02-03/biden-won-t-likely-deliver-for-liberal-democrats

A series of executive actions by President Joe Biden has pulled U.S. policy to the left on a range of issues including fracking, abortion and transgender athletes. Progressives should savor the moment, because it could well represent a peak in their efforts to change the country.

Biden came into office with a very progressive platform. But it is entirely possible, even likely, that he won't deliver on much of it. His immigration proposal is for show, not an attempt to get something through Congress. Democratic Senator Joe Manchin's opposition means he may not have 51 votes for a $15 minimum wage, let alone the 60 that Senate rules probably require. Democrats don't have nearly enough votes to create new states, block voter-identification laws or increase gun regulation. Legislation on some of those issues would struggle even to pass the House.

Other items on the liberal wish list that are vanishingly unlikely to happen include passage of the Equality Act, a new public option for health care and an end to the Hyde Amendment that restricts Medicaid funding for abortion. Forget about packing the Supreme Court.

That doesn't mean Congress will leave Biden empty-handed. Covid-relief legislation is likely to pass, albeit with a lower price tag and smaller checks for households than Biden wants. Higher taxes on corporations and capital gains look doable. Biden will get judges confirmed. If Covid and the economy cooperate, Biden's polls may hold up. The tight margins in Congress may keep Democrats from being able to overreach and thus prevent a backlash.

Still, it's going to be a letdown for many on the left....
(article continues)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on February 03, 2021, 04:55:59 PM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on February 03, 2021, 09:53:42 AM
I found this story/interview with a South Carolina mom leaving QAnon (and how she became interested in them to begin with) to be quite interesting:

https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/03/tech/qanon-mom-former-believer/index.html
I might watch this sometime. My sister got pulled into the conspiracy. I actually think she was indoctrinated through new-age anti-vax which slowly turned into a kind of a cult when she sped from voting Biden in the primary to protesting masks to voting trump and believing he won to breaking with all family over their refusal to agree with her. This is a cult. I have one other family member who voted trump but disavowed him this time around.
What changes people's minds when they've been deeply embedded in a belief system that becomes part of their identity? That's a hard thing. We have to be somewhat self-conscious and also have self-critique about our personal epistemology.     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 03, 2021, 06:19:49 PM
Quote from: milk on February 03, 2021, 04:55:59 PM
This is a cult. I have one other family member who voted trump but disavowed him this time around.
What changes people's minds when they've been deeply embedded in a belief system that becomes part of their identity? That's a hard thing. We have to be somewhat self-conscious and also have self-critique about our personal epistemology.     

Truly a cult...The Unexamined Life....
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 03, 2021, 06:25:02 PM
Quote from: T. D. on February 03, 2021, 04:33:41 AM
The ignore list is my friend.  :D All of those you allude to have resided there since my very first few days on the forum.

Testify!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on February 03, 2021, 06:41:07 PM
Quote from: Handelian on February 03, 2021, 12:21:37 PM
Real progress killing babies. What the ancient Spartans were good at I believe!

We've moved on to eating the babies.  Do keep up.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 03, 2021, 07:34:27 PM
Quote from: Daverz on February 03, 2021, 06:41:07 PM
We've moved on to eating the babies.  Do keep up.

Why were the Spartans so precious, I wonder?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on February 04, 2021, 05:44:34 AM
Quote from: Handelian on November 12, 2020, 01:15:03 AM
Sorry mate, but you won't get any change out of those who are convinced that Trump was a dictator, even though any examination of his term of office shows how ludicrous such a charge is. The fact that he is uncouth and vulgar does not make a man a dictator, as he had the American constitution to contend with.

Quote from: Handelian on November 11, 2020, 05:00:29 AM
It amuses me as a disinterested third party from another country, the self-righteous condemnation of Trump for contesting the election and accusing him of stirring up hate.

I don't know why but it seems enlightening to repost this, from a "disinterested party".
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 04, 2021, 05:45:39 AM
Michael Gerson: Trumpism is American fascism

It is revealing how a political movement that claims to be dedicated to the recovery of national greatness has so readily and completely abandoned many defining national ideals. Donald Trump's promise of American strength has involved the betrayal of American identity.

One of the most important strands of our founding ideology is civic republicanism. In this tradition, the common good is not automatically produced by a clash of competing interests. A just society must be consciously constructed by citizens possessing certain virtues. A democracy in particular depends on people who take responsibility for their communities, show an active concern for the welfare of their neighbors, demand integrity from public officials, defend the rule of law, and respect the rights and dignity of others. Without these moral commitments, a majority is merely a mob.

What type of citizen has Trump — and his supportive partisan media — produced? Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) still holds her job in Congress because she is representative of ascendant MAGA radicalism. Those who reflect her overt racism, her unhinged conspiracy thinking and her endorsement of violence against public figures are now treated as a serious political constituency within the Republican Party. Trump has come down firmly on Greene's side. One participant in the Jan. 6 attack sent a video to her children saying: "We broke into the Capitol. . . . We got inside, we did our part. We were looking for Nancy [Pelosi] to shoot her in the friggin' brain, but we didn't find her." The detail that gets to me? She sent this to her children. She was living in a mental world where vile, shameful things are a parent's boast. And she saw her actions as the expression of a public duty — an example of doing her part.

Call this civic barbarism. Instead of promoting the values of responsible citizenship, Trump and his media enablers are elevating and blessing the very worst among us. They are making many Americans less suited for self-government and more dangerous to their neighbors. And they are doing so for the reason some of the Founders most feared: To lead the mob against true democracy.

How can anyone view the trashing of our founding tradition as evidence of patriotism? Because some have adopted a very different political philosophy than the Founders held. This approach to government promises the recovery of a mythical past. It feeds a sense of White victimhood. It emphasizes emotion over reason. It denigrates experts and expertise. It slanders outsiders and blames them for social and economic ills. It warns of global plots by Jews and shadowy elites. It accepts the lies of a leader as a deeper form of political truth. It revels in anger and dehumanization. It praises law and order while reserving the right to disobey the law and overturn the political order through violence.

This is a reality that I have resisted naming. The 45th president and a significant portion of his supporters have embraced American fascism. And Trump's buffoonery does not disprove the point. Though he probably cannot name the political theory he has embraced, his own recklessness, vanity and authoritarian instincts have led him down fascist grooves. He displays an intuitive affinity for leaders such as Russia's Vladimir Putin, Turkey's Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Hungary's Viktor Orban. And Trump would have subverted the legitimate result of the 2020 presidential election if he could have, which would have broken a constitutional continuity that has endured over two centuries.

I don't think Trump came particularly close to success. This time. But the influence of his treacherous ideology is still being spread by unprincipled people seeking influence and profit. American fascism needs to be aggressively marginalized.

This won't happen if responsible Republicans decline to engage the debate or leave the field entirely. Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah), Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) and Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.) need reinforcements. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) needs relentless ridicule for his weakness.

The task of marginalization will also be more difficult if those on the left try to lump all conservatives into Trump's camp — arguing that fascism is somehow the natural destination of Barry Goldwater's nomination or Ronald Reagan's presidency. This is utter rubbish. I was involved, for example, in the running ideological conflict between Rep. Jack Kemp (R-N.Y.), whom I worked for, and Pat Buchanan, who previewed Trumpism. Kemp was the more authentically conservative voice. And there is a massive moral gap between the politics of George H.W. Bush, George W. Bush, John McCain and Mitt Romney on one side, and Trump's civic barbarism.

Much about the United States' political future will depend on shaping a compelling, responsible American conservatism as an alternative to the Trump temptation. This may or may not happen within the GOP. But for American democracy to fully function, civic republicanism will eventually need a home on the political right.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 04, 2021, 05:47:49 AM
Quote from: Herman on February 04, 2021, 05:44:34 AM
I don't know why but it seems enlightening to repost this, from a "disinterested party".

"disinterested" doesn't make him informed. As if someone who has prejudged Biden to be a "con man" is "disinterested."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on February 04, 2021, 06:52:12 AM
Quote from: Handelian on February 03, 2021, 11:03:01 PM
A very good deflect from the truth

The truth is that it's the same kind of rhetoric.  The same kind of rhetoric that led to doctors being assassinated and now mobs sacking the capitol and murdering police.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 04, 2021, 07:57:14 AM
Jennifer Rubin: Rs look at these people as their "base," the rest of us should recognize this is a social pathology. We have significant mass of extremists who embrace violence. We can vote out extremists and their weak-kneed enablers, but the problem is outside DC

House Republicans are a lost cause. But what about their followers? (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/02/04/house-gop-is-lost-cause-what-about-their-followers/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on February 04, 2021, 01:21:35 PM
Quote from: Dowder on February 04, 2021, 11:26:51 AM
Out of the 74 million who voted for Trump, how many were at the capitol on January 6th? Of those, how many tried to take over Congress that day? Does that even matter to you?

Enough to threaten the lives of elected officials. To get a few thousand to attack the capitol required an enormous pool of deluded people from which to draw because only a small percentage of the deluded are willing to resort to violence. Last I heard, more than 50% of Trump supporters believe(d) the election was stolen. That's an enormous pool and the pool is the problem.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on February 04, 2021, 10:41:56 PM
Quote from: Handelian on February 04, 2021, 10:27:11 PM
My dear boy they were mobs burning whole cities and killing people to the applause of the liberals

On Fox.

In reality those burned cities are still buzzing along.

You mean those killed by the Kyle kid? The GMG right wingers were idolizing him.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on February 04, 2021, 10:57:46 PM
I bet you're reading some news, yeah.

The reality is those Portland riots and elsewhere were confined to a couple of city blocks (it's the way it always happens, same with Ferguson; riots are lazy things). Your news sources take camera angles that make it look as big as possible, because white people want to be scared of black people. So, most people went about their business as folks were rioting downtown. The diner cop, who's from Portland, was writing a million posts a day while his neigbourhood was supposedly destroyed by evil black / radical leftwingers.

The other thing is, a substantial portion of the destruction and violence was done by the same kind of people who came to the DC Capitol. They came supposedly to protect business, but you can't bake an omelet without breaking some eggs. There's the famous footage of the Minneapolis Umbrella Guy who was smashing windows. White rightwing guy. There's this Ritterhouse kid, just a suburban white kid who watched fox all day, driving all day to shoot some bad people. And there was always a Proud Boy contingent stirring up the pot.

I don't really know why I'm even talking about this. Guys like you and Dowder are on a perpetual repeat loop. Dead enders.

Biden was duly elected in what Republican and Democratic officials called one of the cleanest and most orderly * elections ever, and that's why he's president now, got it?

* Republican observers abusing, threatening and yelling at recount officials is perhaps not quite clean or orderly, but a lot of Republicans can't help themselves. They're sore losers.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on February 05, 2021, 04:51:22 AM
Quote from: Handelian on February 04, 2021, 10:40:23 PM
The fact that innocent were killed in the riots that took place last year doesn't matter?

The purpose of the protests was to protect life. The purpose of the insurrection was violence and, if one listens to the massed voices of hundreds of people, to kill. Those two goals are exact opposites. You are making a despicable false equivalence. And, by the way, Donald Trump was by far the greatest source of violence during the BLM protests, responsible for more than the next hundred people involved. He used paramilitary troops to assault hundreds of peaceful protestors for the sake of a photo op; he ordered the illegal kidnapping and jailing of US citizens.

Quote from: Handelian on February 04, 2021, 10:40:23 PMThe fact that Democrats demonstrated four months outside in 2016 and for years tried to impeach Trump with a bogus accusations of Russian interference is nothing new?
So you are another person who hasn't read the Mueller Report and has no idea what it concluded. In Part 1 it detailed multiple instances of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian operatives. Part 2 laid out ten clear and prosecutable instances of obstruction of justice. 

Quote from: Handelian on February 04, 2021, 10:40:23 PMCome on, just typical that it once I do it it's okay and if another side do it it's wrong. The Democrats contested the 2016 election just as hotly. The hypocrisy they are showing is quite astounding

Those protesting Trump's election had a plausible case — oh, and they didn't storm the capitol and they didn't murder police officers. Another lazy false equivalence.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on February 05, 2021, 04:55:31 AM
Quote from: Handelian on February 04, 2021, 10:40:23 PM
The fact that innocent were killed in the riots that took place last year doesn't matter? That is swept under the carpet by Biden and Harris. The fact that Democrats demonstrated four months outside in 2016 and for years tried to impeach Trump with a bogus accusations of Russian interference is nothing new? Come on, just typical that it once I do it it's okay and if another side do it it's wrong. The Democrats contested the 2016 election just as hotly. The hypocrisy they are showing is quite astounding

It is fatuous and/or insincere to compare the BLM protests, such as Minneapolis or Portland, with what happened at the Capital on January.  One a bunch of people complaining about systematic racism or other ills of society;  the other a direct assault on the democratic process with duly elected officials physically threatened.

"Danger" to the nation or democracy from BLM or ANTIFA is an entirely invalid notion fabricated by the Alt-right media and social network groups.  I can't go so far as to say these happenings were "false flag" events, but it is clear that Alt-right provocateurs were present fewer or greater numbers.

These protests, (or riots if you insist), in so far as violence and vandalism were concerned, were a local nuisance at worst.  Authorities in various instances grossly over reacted with police presence and force.
By contrast authorities were grossly unprepared for the January 6th assault -- one wonders why that was the case?  Inquiries may yet reveal that certain authorities were sympathetic with the mob's intent to threaten elected government.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on February 05, 2021, 05:34:30 AM
BLM was 99.9% peaceful protests.  They were not riots.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 05, 2021, 06:02:26 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on February 05, 2021, 04:51:22 AM
Those protesting Trump's election had a plausible case — oh, and they didn't storm the capitol and they didn't murder police officers. Another lazy false equivalence.

Also, Clinton didn't file 51 spurious lawsuits.  Someone is not particularly well informed.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on February 05, 2021, 09:22:49 PM
Quote from: Handelian on February 05, 2021, 08:43:14 PM
Oh boy have they got your number. Even with the biased media over here it was obvious the attacks on police and desire for anarchy. 30 police injured. Of course because it's done by the left-wing then it's alright and even the most violent burning of houses and rampaging by a mob is 'peaceful'. The fact is we live in a post truth society where burning buildings and looting is dressed up as peaceful protest including by the VP. My dear old pal you may be taken in by it but some of us are not

I'm not condoning the Black Lives Matter movement's vandalism and destruction, but I can almost guarantee you that if it were Black Lives Matter protesters that stormed the Capitol they would've been shot or gassed immediately with no questions asked yet when an all-white group raids the Capitol with the intent to harm, or kill, elected officials, not one of them was shot on site until they got well inside of the Capitol building. This isn't a media slant these are the facts and the fact of the matter is the Black Lives Matter protesters had a good reason to be upset: they're tired of the way they've been profiled by the police. The Trump supporters, on the other hand, have no reason to be upset. He lost in an election, but yet pouted like an oversized, orange-glazed baby, so what was his last resort? Inciting a coup that not only disgraced his already failed presidency, but it only reinforced a well-known fact: he wasn't fit to be president. If he had accepted defeat like a man and wished Biden well then his reputation may have not been as tarnished as it now.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on February 05, 2021, 11:24:03 PM
Deadenders on perpetual repeat.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on February 06, 2021, 03:19:04 AM
Quote from: Handelian on February 05, 2021, 08:44:47 PM
The purpose of protest was to protect life? Funny then there was so many people killed by the rampaging mob and so many lies threatened. The problem is that people will say the black is white and white is black according to their politics and not according to the facts. ...

Here's a couple of facts for you:
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on February 06, 2021, 05:48:54 AM
Quote from: Handelian on February 05, 2021, 08:44:47 PM
Trump had nothing to do with the BLM protests just as Johnson had nothing to do with them over here. Some of us don't believe every bit of propaganda that comes out. Saying things are lazy equivalents might sound good but it doesn't make it true. It is interesting that the present liberal elite are full of these convenient catch phrases.

You are uninformed.

Here is film of the assault Trump ordered against peaceful and lawfully assembled BLM protesters in Washington DC:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbfmcys6gIY

Trump was personally responsible for ordering and inciting much of the violence at BLM protests because he knew it would please his racist and white supremacist supporters.

False equivalence isn't a catch phrase. It's a simple description of equating peaceful protesters with a violent and murderous mob attempting to overthrow the government.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on February 06, 2021, 07:46:56 AM
     Kevin McCarthy has announced he is in the process of not knowing very much about QAnon. Formerly he knew enough to say QAnon has no place in the Repub party. One day, perhaps soon, McCarthy will not know very much about anything at all, making him an ideal choice to lead his party as it is presently constituted.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 06, 2021, 08:08:14 AM
Well, Republican voters do prefer their elected officials not to know things.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on February 06, 2021, 02:46:01 PM
Quote from: drogulus on February 06, 2021, 07:46:56 AM
     Kevin McCarthy has announced he is in the process of not knowing very much about QAnon. Formerly he knew enough to say QAnon has no place in the Repub party. One day, perhaps soon, McCarthy will not know very much about anything at all, making him an ideal choice to lead his party as it is presently constituted.
Yes, I heard his comments about not knowing who they were... including mispronouncing their name.  :( >:(
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on February 06, 2021, 09:34:56 PM
Quote from: Handelian on November 11, 2020, 05:00:29 AM
It amuses me as a disinterested third party from another country, the self-righteous condemnation of Trump for contesting the election and accusing him of stirring up hate. I seem to remember that four years ago there were incredible protests by the other side concerning Trump's victory with unsubstantiated claims and also people demonstrating for weeks saying how much they hated Trump. A guy I read was even attacked by one of the mob of Trump haters for questioning their motives!  :D
You have to be able to keep more than one view in your head at one time. It's not hard. Trump didn't just "contest the election." He claimed victory before the votes were cast and then claimed it was stolen. He told his supporters before the election not to do mail in voting and then claimed victory before the mail-in votes were counted. After that, he spread lies and pressured officials and acted irresponsibly. No other president has rejected the democratic process like this. He primed and conned his supporters before the election and then acted belligerently after it according to his script. The upshot was a deadly embarrassment for the country. But trump told the world back in 2016 that he'd only accept elections if he won.
Demonstrations on the other side - various kinds - are ALSO wrong when they attack people, destroy property, etc.
but you have to be able to contain both views in your head.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on February 06, 2021, 09:47:04 PM
Quote from: Handelian on February 04, 2021, 10:40:23 PM
The fact that innocent were killed in the riots that took place last year doesn't matter? That is swept under the carpet by Biden and Harris. The fact that Democrats demonstrated four months outside in 2016 and for years tried to impeach Trump with a bogus accusations of Russian interference is nothing new? Come on, just typical that it once I do it it's okay and if another side do it it's wrong. The Democrats contested the 2016 election just as hotly. The hypocrisy they are showing is quite astounding
Trump got a lot of hatred from the left just as Obama got from the right and so on back in time. People are entitled to hate the president/candidate, his/her policies, party, etc. The democrats made a case that pressuring a foreign country to get involved in an election was an impeachable offense. Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't. The impeachment was not violent and the case was made, and rejected, by the Senate based on politics just like the one against Bill Clinton. You can think what you like about any of that stuff.
Trump did not "contest the election." He claimed it was a fraud and promised his supporters that if they fought hard enough they could overturn the process. He also tried to pressure officials as well to force the country into a worse crisis. The fact that so few lives were lost is a miracle.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on February 06, 2021, 11:13:05 PM
Quote from: drogulus on February 06, 2021, 07:46:56 AM
     Kevin McCarthy has announced he is in the process of not knowing very much about QAnon. Formerly he knew enough to say QAnon has no place in the Repub party. One day, perhaps soon, McCarthy will not know very much about anything at all, making him an ideal choice to lead his party as it is presently constituted.

:laugh:
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on February 06, 2021, 11:51:10 PM
Quote from: milk on February 06, 2021, 09:47:04 PM
Trump got a lot of hatred from the left just as Obama got from the right and so on back in time. People are entitled to hate the president/candidate, his/her policies, party, etc. The democrats made a case that pressuring a foreign country to get involved in an election was an impeachable offense. Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't. The impeachment was not violent and the case was made, and rejected, by the Senate based on politics just like the one against Bill Clinton. You can think what you like about any of that stuff.
Trump did not "contest the election." He claimed it was a fraud and promised his supporters that if they fought hard enough they could overturn the process. He also tried to pressure officials as well to force the country into a worse crisis. The fact that so few lives were lost is a miracle.

It's also worth keeping in mind that Trump basically ceased the business of governing from the oval office since late October (if not much earlier). The country is in various forms of crisis due to covid and joblessness; all he cared about was his reelection / legal immunity. If you think about it, it's pretty hard what the Trump deadenders are really wishing for, other than a giant vacuum in the government of the country.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on February 07, 2021, 02:22:39 AM
Quote from: Herman on February 06, 2021, 11:51:10 PM
It's also worth keeping in mind that Trump basically ceased the business of governing from the oval office since late October (if not much earlier). The country is in various forms of crisis due to covid and joblessness; all he cared about was his reelection / legal immunity. If you think about it, it's pretty hard what the Trump deadenders are really wishing for, other than a giant vacuum in the government of the country.
It's exhausting arguing with these people. All they're doing is gaslighting. Trump and his people are a poison. They've really poisoned things. I've got family members who make believing all this stuff the condition upon which a relationship with them is possible. And when he stood up and ripped off his mask like a scene from a David Lynch movie, he encouraged people in that conspiratorial direction too. I can't come up with the language that's harsh enough to describe his unprecedented poisoning of American political life. I don't know, did Berlusconi do something similar to Italy? Only he didn't have nuclear codes.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on February 07, 2021, 04:26:04 AM
Quote from: Herman on February 06, 2021, 11:51:10 PM
It's also worth keeping in mind that Trump basically ceased the business of governing from the oval office since late October (if not much earlier). The country is in various forms of crisis due to covid and joblessness; all he cared about was his reelection / legal immunity. If you think about it, it's pretty hard what the Trump deadenders are really wishing for, other than a giant vacuum in the government of the country.

Some where above in this thread I suggested what is followers are looking for.  To boil it down to the essence, it's a more prosperous, White, less urban (or at least less urbane) American.  Trump was never able or willing to deliver this.

... There's the tragedy:  Trump was a complete fraud and his promises a delusion.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on February 07, 2021, 10:27:26 AM
Some of you here might appreciate this segment from Saturday Night Live--the part about Trump and him not wanting to testify.  It's starts about 2:40 minutes in. :

https://ijr.com/snls-urges-trump-testify-during-senates-impeachment-trial/

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on February 07, 2021, 12:36:13 PM
Quote from: Handelian on February 07, 2021, 12:22:39 PM
Also wonder what people are doing voting for an old man who should have long since been retired! For four years too. Unless he was a convenient shoe-in for Harris
I believe(d) that he genuinely cares about people and the US and is not just there for himself or 'his dynasty' and is trying to make things better; just because one is older also doesn't mean they are incapable of doing a good job.  One learns things over the course of ones life; in many cultures, elders are respected.  And, he's worked throughout his lifetime to trying to help people by devoting his life to public service.  Please ponder this.

Respectfully,

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on February 07, 2021, 12:36:21 PM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on February 07, 2021, 10:27:26 AM
Some of you here might appreciate this segment from Saturday Night Live--the part about Trump and him not wanting to testify.  It's starts about 2:40 minutes in. :

https://ijr.com/snls-urges-trump-testify-during-senates-impeachment-trial/

PD

That was good!  If you haven't seen it yet you should watch Spitting Image on YT.  Equal opportunity offenders, they make fun of everyone.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCov3Uxwgh6Fq_2F7oW9-hA (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCov3Uxwgh6Fq_2F7oW9-hA)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 07, 2021, 12:37:16 PM
Quote from: Fëanor on February 07, 2021, 04:26:04 AM
Some where above in this thread I suggested what is followers are looking for.  To boil it down to the essence, it's a more prosperous, White, less urban (or at least less urbane) American.  Trump was never able or willing to deliver this.

... There's the tragedy:  Trump was a complete fraud and his promises a delusion.

Truly, tragedy because it was a choice. Anyone who paid attention (especially people from New York) knew all along that he's a fraud.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: bhodges on February 07, 2021, 12:47:24 PM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on February 07, 2021, 12:36:13 PM
I believe(d) that he genuinely cares about people and the US and is not just there for himself or 'his dynasty' and is trying to make things better; just because one is older also doesn't mean they are incapable of doing a good job.  One learns things over the course of ones life; in many cultures, elders are respected.  And, he's worked throughout his lifetime to trying to help people by devoting his life to public service.  Please ponder this.

Respectfully,

PD

This is my feeling, too, and confirmed by his reactions to things -- reactions to human beings and very human concerns. His predecessor was unable to comprehend any of this.

--Bruce
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: bhodges on February 07, 2021, 12:49:47 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 07, 2021, 12:37:16 PM
Truly, tragedy because it was a choice. Anyone who paid attention (especially people from New York) knew all along that he's a fraud.

Yes. And as someone in New York in the 1980s and 1990s, can confirm this is the case. He was pretty much ostracized by anyone who was paying attention.

--Bruce
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 07, 2021, 01:23:51 PM
Quote from: milk on February 06, 2021, 09:34:56 PM
You have to be able to keep more than one view in your head at one time. It's not hard. Trump didn't just "contest the election." He claimed victory before the votes were cast and then claimed it was stolen. He told his supporters before the election not to do mail in voting and then claimed victory before the mail-in votes were counted. After that, he spread lies and pressured officials and acted irresponsibly. No other president has rejected the democratic process like this. He primed and conned his supporters before the election and then acted belligerently after it according to his script. The upshot was a deadly embarrassment for the country. But trump told the world back in 2016 that he'd only accept elections if he won.
Demonstrations on the other side - various kinds - are ALSO wrong when they attack people, destroy property, etc.
but you have to be able to contain both views in your head.

It would also help if he argued in good faith.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 07, 2021, 01:29:28 PM
Quote from: Handelian on February 04, 2021, 10:40:23 PM
The fact that innocent were killed in the riots that took place last year doesn't matter? That is swept under the carpet by Biden and Harris.

False.

QuoteThe fact that Democrats demonstrated four months outside in 2016 and for years tried to impeach Trump with a bogus accusations of Russian interference is nothing new?

Nothing bogus about the accusations.

QuoteCome on, just typical that it once I do it it's okay and if another side do it it's wrong. The Democrats contested the 2016 election just as hotly. The hypocrisy they are showing is quite astounding

Your embrace of outright falsehoods, and your lazy dependence upon false equivalence belie your disingenuous pose as "a disinterested observer."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on February 07, 2021, 02:07:17 PM
Quote from: Handelian on February 04, 2021, 10:40:23 PM
The Democrats contested the 2016 election just as hotly.

Complete fantasy.

Hillary Clinton called Trump to concede the day after the election.  She called on her supporters to give Trump "an open mind and a chance to lead."

There were some scattered objections from sitting members of the House, but they are quickly shut down by ... Joe Biden. 

https://www.rollcall.com/2017/01/06/trump-election-is-made-official-over-scattered-objections/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/on-leadership/wp/2016/11/09/hillary-clinton-didnt-give-her-concession-speech-on-election-night-now-we-see-one-reason-why/



Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 07, 2021, 03:39:59 PM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on February 07, 2021, 10:27:26 AM
Some of you here might appreciate this segment from Saturday Night Live--the part about Trump and him not wanting to testify.  It's starts about 2:40 minutes in. :

https://ijr.com/snls-urges-trump-testify-during-senates-impeachment-trial/

PD

Fun!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on February 07, 2021, 05:28:14 PM
Does Trump being kicked out of the Screen Actors Guild mean he can't make another series of The Apprentice?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on February 07, 2021, 07:44:15 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on February 07, 2021, 05:28:14 PM
Does Trump being kicked out of the Screen Actors Guild mean he can't make another series of The Apprentice?

At this juncture, I think it's safe to say that many organizations have severed their ties with Trump. His name brings nothing but misfortune, but the fact he pulled what he did before exiting office, has caused a ripple effect which we haven't even seen the magnitude as of yet. All I can say is get your popcorn ready. :)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on February 07, 2021, 09:19:11 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on February 07, 2021, 05:28:14 PM
Does Trump being kicked out of the Screen Actors Guild mean he can't make another series of The Apprentice?

What? Trump was kicked out? I thought he resigned himself. This is how ignorant I am now that I follow US politics quite passively again...  :P
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on February 07, 2021, 11:49:22 PM
OMG, having exhausted all the other cliché's (Biden is senile etc) we're going to get the 'baby killing" thing now?

Biden is a catholic; goes to church. Your hero, Trump, was a serial philanderer and 'man about town' who boasted his Vietnam was avoiding SOTAs. Just try to imagine how many checks he wrote for abortions.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on February 07, 2021, 11:56:40 PM
Quote from: Handelian on February 07, 2021, 11:04:33 PM
Your trust is very touching but please look at his track record. He is just one of the White House aristocracy who is got back in there. And the first thing he does in public service to his country is fund the killing of babies out of public money. Please ponder this

Respectful of human life

Handelian

This line is many years past its sell-by date.  Conservatives don't and never did care about infant mortality, heavy metal exposure, childhood nutrition, or healthcare.  They love knocking down consumer and environmental regulations aimed at protecting life. They love the death penalty, unrestricted access to guns, and warmongering.  They don't care about workplace safety, the safety of the food and water supply, clean air, or preventing or even mitigating the global catastrophe of climate change (if they even acknowledge it).  They've even politicized the wearing of masks during a global pandemic that has killed millions worldwide, refusing to make even this small sacrifice for the safety of their neighbors.  They are a nihilistic death cult at this point.   

Let's put it this way: conservatives want to force every pregnancy to come to term, but when asked to wear a mask bleat about fascist liberals taking away their freedoms.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on February 08, 2021, 04:11:57 AM
Quote from: Handelian on February 07, 2021, 11:04:33 PM
Your trust is very touching but please look at his track record. He is just one of the White House aristocracy who is got back in there. And the first thing he does in public service to his country is fund the killing of babies out of public money. Please ponder this

Respectful of human life

Handelian

Republicans care about life until the child is actually born. Once a child has born they stop giving rat's ass what happens to the child. They don't care if the parent's have enough food stamps to feed the child or money to keep the house warm during winter. In fact a couple of decades later they don't mind inflicting death penalty upon that same person whose life they wanted to protect before the birth.  :-\

People are against abortion because of the Bible, but the Bible is not against abortion. Sure, the Bible is a self-contradictory mess, but it talks about "bitter water" unfaithful women should drink to have miscarriage. Religious people just don't know their holy books that well and instead let religious institutions and people in power use holy books to mislead and oppress themselves. Oftentimes politicians opposing abortion do them themselves. They are rich and in power. They have the means to do abortions. They can go to a state that has relaxed abortion rules. They oppose abortion to get the votes and support of mislead people. The Republicans have NOTHING substantial to offer to the regular people (because they are 100 % corrupt to serve the top 1 %) so they offer things like conservative social constracts, bigotry and racism. Right wing corporate outlets such as Fox News have done their part in brainwashing people into buying these disgusting ideologies.

Sure, you don't need a holy book to oppose something. You can be against abortion if you want, but that means you don't get to dictate other people what to do. You can only refrain yourself of having abortions (if you are a woman, that is). The US was founded a SECULAR country with religious liberties. The US is not supposed to establish any religion, only allow people to practise their religion or practise no religion at all. In a secular country the law-makers are suppose to base their decisions at least partially on facts and science when available. What does science tell us about when a fetus becomes a human being?

US solders are sent to the Middle East to die for cheap oil. That's not "pro-life". That's "pro-corporate profits." Anti-abortion doctrine is about controlling people, especially women and to have the support and votes of people brainwashed into the doctrine. Sorry about this rant, but I'm so tired of all the greed-based anti-intellectualism in the World that does so much harm and so little good. I am not even a fan of Biden as everybody knows. He can't wait to work with these crazy Republicans in a bipartisan way. That is a huge problem.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on February 08, 2021, 04:42:35 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on February 08, 2021, 04:11:57 AM
...
Anti-abortion doctrine is about controlling people, especially women and to have the support and votes of people brainwashed into the doctrine. Sorry about this rant, but I'm so tired of all the greed-based anti-intellectualism in the World that does so much harm and so little good. ...

That hits the nail on the head.  Anti-abortion is about control of women, mainly men's control of women.  It isn't mainly about religion although many doctrines of world religion are obviously related to control of women, (often under the guise of "protecting" then).

High birth rates are a major problem though out world.  Even it we can manage to feed people, we don't have the resources to deliver healthy and fulfilling lifestyles to ballooning population numbers, plus there is the environmental impact.  A major part of controlling family size is shown to relate to female education and women's greater control over own reproduction.

But ... if you're a woman and don't believe in abortion, don't have one.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on February 08, 2021, 06:22:13 PM
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/in-americas-uncivil-war-republicans-are-the-aggressors/

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on February 08, 2021, 06:46:44 PM
Quote from: Handelian on February 08, 2021, 12:05:08 AM
You and I have both had the privilege of being born and you people want to deny others the privilege

     I exercised no privilege or right in getting born. There was no "I" to exercise anything. It was my mom who decided which baby would would be"me", or which "me" would be a baby. None of "us" has anything to complain about.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on February 08, 2021, 09:44:03 PM
Quote from: Handelian on February 08, 2021, 12:05:08 AM
You and I have both had the privilege of being born and you people want to deny others the privilege

We pro-choice people don't want abortions!

Nobody likes abortions, but sometimes its the answer in a difficult situation. Implicating people want to do abortions is ignoring the trauma abortion cause to women and how difficult such a choice is to make. The "rights" of the unborn child are one thing, but there are other factors to consider such as the rights of women to control their own body. The World is a complex place and sometimes sadly abortion is the answer. That's why abortion exists in the first place. Denying someones privileges is a silly concept here: How far back in time does this logic apply? Is using condom denying someones priviledge of being born? Is not going out on a date potentially denying someones priviledge of being born? At what point in time does this priviledge emerge? Even without abortion miscarriage is a thing. Our birth is not a 100 % sure thing before it actually happens.

It's also good to keep in mind that pro-life laws don't prevent abortions happening, only makes it harder and more dangerous for women to have them. Better way to prevent abortions is better sex education in school, but ironically often the same conservatives who are loudly pro-life also oppose sex education...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on February 08, 2021, 09:55:28 PM
Quote from: Handelian on February 08, 2021, 12:05:08 AM
Democrats don't care much for in the mortality as they believe in killing babies. It's fundamental to their policy. You can start churning out these accusations and bleeding away but that is a fact. Sorry but you're talking nonsense to try and divert the facts. You and I have both had the privilege of being born and you people want to deny others the privilege

So a woman is raped by a criminal and becomes pregnant, she should keep the child because it's the 'right' thing to do according to you?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on February 08, 2021, 11:21:25 PM
Quote from: Handelian on February 08, 2021, 11:07:49 PM
to people like you the snuffing out of life is all important

Nobody, literally nobody says, 'I feel like having an abortion today'. Or 'This is going to be fun, I'm going to talk this woman into having an abortion'. The only ones who are cynically using other people's bad luck and unhappiness as a political wedge issue are the pro-lifers, who, of course, generously support guns, who deny school shootings are 'real' and releasing toxic material into the environment if it helps business (i.e. stock holders).

However, all these issues have been discussed ad nauseam, too. It's like talking to a Republican / Conservative Party Talking Point Robot.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Rinaldo on February 09, 2021, 01:30:29 AM
Names change, trolling stays the same. Killing babies, rad!

https://www.youtube.com/v/fbU1zYzD-Tw
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on February 09, 2021, 05:39:37 AM
Quote from: Handelian on February 08, 2021, 11:32:30 PM
What nonsense. I'm not using any political wedge. Neither am I a gun toting right winger. I just don't believe in killing babies anymore than I believe in school shootings. Amazing the way you guys say you don't believe in guns yet you believe in killing babies. Where is your logic? If you don't believe in guns then why do you believe in killing babies?

I don't believe in killing babies either.  Then again a fetus not a baby, much less is an embryo a baby.  That's because while human fetuses and embryos are obviously human, they are not yet human beings.  IMO, a women's right to terminate a pregnancy would not be objected to on the grounds that she is killing a baby, that is, a human being, because she isn't.

(If you want to split hairs you may argue the late-term fetuses are close enough to being babies to warrant being treated as humans, but that's a tangent I'm not going to debate here.)

I'm  reminded that I was told that Inuit cultures, (prior to White influence), did not consider a baby and human being until it was able to sit up by itself.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on February 09, 2021, 07:16:35 AM
This is not a good discussion. The question when a fetus becomes a human being is indeterminate.

The thing to keep in mind is no one feels good about having an abortion. The issue is whether the baby that will eventually be born has a chance of a good life. So, does it have debilitating health issues? We can now screen fetuses at a really early moment. Some right-to-life people want mothers to go ahead and have the baby no matter what.

Also, you cannot demand that a woman will have a baby (+ 16 years) after a violent rape. If one or two women do, fine, but that doesn't mean other women should do so, too. The real issue is, of course, that men want to decide for women.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on February 09, 2021, 07:22:22 AM
The impeachment trial starts at noon today.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on February 09, 2021, 07:24:00 AM
Quote from: Herman on February 09, 2021, 07:16:35 AM
This is not a good discussion. The question when a fetus becomes a human being is indeterminate.

The thing to keep in mind is no one feels good about having an abortion. The issue is whether the baby that will eventually be born has a chance of a good life. So, does it have debilitating health issues? We can now screen fetuses at a really early moment. Some right-to-life people want mothers to go ahead and have the baby no matter what.

Also, you cannot demand that a woman will have a baby (+ 16 years) after a violent rape. If one or two women do, fine, but that doesn't mean other women should do so, too. The real issue is, of course, that men want to decide for women.

What this implies to me is that we -- or at least the common weal -- ought not to be judgemental about an woman's decision for abortion.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 09, 2021, 08:28:13 AM
Quote from: Herman on February 09, 2021, 07:16:35 AM
This is not a good discussion. The question when a fetus becomes a human being is indeterminate.

The thing to keep in mind is no one feels good about having an abortion. The issue is whether the baby that will eventually be born has a chance of a good life. So, does it have debilitating health issues? We can now screen fetuses at a really early moment. Some right-to-life people want mothers to go ahead and have the baby no matter what.

Also, you cannot demand that a woman will have a baby (+ 16 years) after a violent rape. If one or two women do, fine, but that doesn't mean other women should do so, too. The real issue is, of course, that men want to decide for women.

Entirely on point.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 09, 2021, 08:29:02 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on February 09, 2021, 07:24:00 AM
What this implies to me is that we -- or at least the common weal -- ought not to be judgement about an woman's decision for abortion.

Indeed.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on February 09, 2021, 08:57:05 AM
Sorry, it starts at 1 p.m.!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: bhodges on February 09, 2021, 09:35:03 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on February 09, 2021, 08:57:05 AM
Sorry, it starts at 1 p.m.!

Trying to multitask, squeezing in some of it during a busy afternoon. But even though I'd seen the January 6 Capitol film footage before, it's still pretty raw and painful to watch.

--Bruce
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on February 09, 2021, 09:39:44 AM
Quote from: Brewski on February 09, 2021, 09:35:03 AM
Trying to multitask, squeezing in some of it during a busy afternoon. But even though I'd seen the January 6 Capitol film footage before, it's still pretty raw and painful to watch.

--Bruce
Agreed.  I was thinking that it must be really hard for those who were there to watch the footage again; it certainly was for me.  :'(

A virtual hug your way,

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: bhodges on February 09, 2021, 09:41:32 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on February 09, 2021, 09:39:44 AM
Agreed.  I was thinking that it must be really hard for those who were there to watch the footage again; it certainly was for me.  :'(

A virtual hug your way,

PD

Hey, thanks for that!  :)

--Bruce
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Brahmsian on February 09, 2021, 09:46:39 AM
Quote from: Brewski on February 09, 2021, 09:35:03 AM
Trying to multitask, squeezing in some of it during a busy afternoon. But even though I'd seen the January 6 Capitol film footage before, it's still pretty raw and painful to watch.

--Bruce

Yes, it was sickening to watch.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on February 09, 2021, 11:16:53 AM
Quote from: Handelian on February 09, 2021, 10:17:37 AM
This is a non-argument. You have no basis in science for saying such a thing. A fetus has everything that the human being requires. All it requires is the chance to be born which people like you are trying to deny it

I think science would say that fetus does not yet possess full human consciousness;  it certainly has not had any significant human, versus rudimentary, experiences thus no awareness of the external world, no memories, and no self-awareness or awareness of other human beings

The question of human potential is irrelevant at this stage of development, that is, no more relevance that for an unfertilized ovum or sperm cell.  Millions of one or the other are "wasted" in a human lifetime.  Furthermore spontaneous abortions of embryos and miscarriages occur all the time with nothing to be done about the putative loss of human potential.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on February 09, 2021, 11:21:27 AM
Quote from: Handelian on February 09, 2021, 10:17:37 AM
This is a non-argument. You have no basis in science for saying such a thing. A fetus has everything that the human being requires. All it requires is the chance to be born which people like you are trying to deny it

And you have no basis in science for saying such a thing either. Your opinion has no more probative value than that of those who believe otherwise. By your own statement, you are saying that it is a potential human being, which lacks a crucial ingredient for being fulfilled. The withholding that ingredient is not your choice to make. Unless I only mistakenly believe you are of the male persuasion. Decisions of that nature are the sole responsibility of the person who must live the rest of her life with the consequences of that choice.

8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Que on February 09, 2021, 11:25:05 AM
Quote from: Handelian on February 09, 2021, 10:17:37 AM
This is a non-argument. You have no basis in science for saying such a thing. A fetus has everything that the human being requires. All it requires is the chance to be born which people like you are trying to deny it

A fetus will not develop into a child that can be born, unless a woman decides to carry it into full maturity.
Whether she decides to do so, is none of anyone's business. A pregnant woman is a person with a right to control of her own body, not an object that is purely instrumental and subordinate to the "right to be born" of any fetus she might carry.

A chicken egg has the potential to mature into a chick.
I wonder: do you consider yourself of killing a chicken every time you eat an egg?  ::)

My general impression is that anti-abortionists' willingness to force women to have children is significantly bigger than their willingness to adopt all those unwanted kids to give them a loving home, or at least pay taxes to properly fund their upbringing. Or to pay taxes for a proper education for any kids, for that matter. No, they rather pay taxes for prisons that can be filled with social rejects when they grow up.

Q
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on February 09, 2021, 12:45:26 PM
Quote from: Handelian on February 09, 2021, 11:49:46 AM
A baby will not develop into an adult if we kill it. Where is your logic? That appears to go out the window with you. Mind you you appear to think that human life is no more worth than chickens. By your logic then a woman has every right to kill her baby up to a certain age? If not why not? Perhaps if she feels the baby is going to become a social reject it would be better for her just to get rid of it? Like the people of Sparta did

Basic vocabulary: fetus/ferilized egg ≠ baby

And, by the way, if you believe a fertilized egg should be inviolate (like my evangelical mom does), then you should know that "God," or whomever or whatever you believe is responsible for the design of the female reproductive system, doesn't give a rat's a$$ about them. About 70% of fertilized eggs never implant in the uterus. By my mom's thinking that would mean God is responsible for the abortion of countless billions.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Rinaldo on February 09, 2021, 12:55:14 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on February 09, 2021, 12:45:26 PM
Basic vocabulary: fetus/ferilized egg ≠ baby

And, by the way, if you believe a fertilized egg should be inviolate (like my evangelical mom does), then you should know that "God," or whomever or whatever you believe is responsible for the design of the female reproductive system, doesn't give a rat's a$$ about them. About 70% of fertilized eggs never implant in the uterus. By my mom's thinking that would mean God is responsible for the abortion of countless billions.

Patrick S. Tomlinson summed it up perfectly few years ago:

QuoteWhenever abortion comes up, I have a question I've been asking for ten years now of the "Life begins at Conception" crowd. In ten years, no one has EVER answered it honestly.

The question is as follows: Would you save one 5-year-old child from a burning building, or save 1,000 embryos. The point: No one actually thinks that embryos are the same as living children. But an entire movement is based on lying about it, and using that lie to manipulate people, in order to control women like slaves.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 09, 2021, 01:31:32 PM
Jennifer Rubin: Let's not forget that the only reason the impeachment, which the House voted on before Trump left office, was not sent to trial immediately was because then-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and his fellow Republicans stalled. They break the hypocrisy meter by turning around and claiming that the Senate, therefore, cannot try Trump now.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Que on February 09, 2021, 01:38:55 PM
Quote from: Handelian on February 09, 2021, 11:49:46 AM
A baby will not develop into an adult if we kill it. Where is your logic? That appears to go out the window with you.

As has already been said: a fertilised egg or fetus is not a baby. Just like your egg at breakfast is not a chicken, and a seed is not a tree. This is entirely logical and no rocket science.

Q
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on February 09, 2021, 06:53:18 PM
Quote from: Rinaldo on February 09, 2021, 12:55:14 PM
Would you save one 5-year-old child from a burning building, or save 1,000 embryos?

Heh. That's really good. I intend to use that at some point.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on February 09, 2021, 10:14:30 PM
Quote from: Handelian on February 09, 2021, 09:48:41 PMSo there are a 100 pregnant women and one baby? So what do you do?

Save the 100 women. Not because they're pregnant but because they're 100 women.

Not 100 " host bodies" as I seem to recall some Trumpists terming them.


So you've told us you're against abortion. Duly noted, for all your opinion is worth. Now move on.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on February 09, 2021, 11:30:06 PM
And if the 100 women I just saved all wanted to end their pregnancies I wouldn't think I had any say in the matter other than to remark on the statistical improbability.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Que on February 10, 2021, 12:00:26 AM
OK, guys. It is indeed time to move on - end of the abortion debate.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on February 10, 2021, 03:09:04 AM
I just watched the 13 minute video produced for the impeachment hearing.

Or really I watched eleven minutes and then I couldn't take it anymore.

And it didn't even say "And here, on these stairs, a woman protester died as people trampled her, because they were too excited at their heroism."

The most charitable thing I can think of is these people were all coked up.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: bhodges on February 10, 2021, 01:42:09 PM
Gentlemen, enough. If you want to continue discussion on the abortion issue, please continue via private messages. Thanks.

--Bruce
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 10, 2021, 01:42:17 PM
Georgia prosecutors open criminal investigation into Trump's efforts to subvert election results (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/in-wake-of-trump-calls-to-state-officials-georgia-prosecutors-open-criminal-investigation-into-efforts-to-subvert-election-results/2021/02/10/17709bd0-6bb3-11eb-9f80-3d7646ce1bc0_story.html)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on February 10, 2021, 01:44:11 PM
"This case is much worse than someone who falsely shouts fire in a crowded theater. It's more like a case where the town fire chief, who's paid to put out fires, sends a mob not to yell fire in a crowded theater but to actually set the theater on fire."

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 10, 2021, 01:44:30 PM
Nearly half the Republicans who will judge Trump bolstered the falsehood that drove the Capitol riot (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/02/10/nearly-half-republicans-who-will-judge-trump-bolstered-falsehood-that-drove-capitol-riot/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 10, 2021, 01:45:14 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on February 10, 2021, 01:44:11 PM
"This case is much worse than someone who falsely shouts fire in a crowded theater. It's more like a case where the town fire chief, who's paid to put out fires, sends a mob not to yell fire in a crowded theater but to actually set the theater on fire."



I saw that, too.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 10, 2021, 03:46:58 PM
Had to watch this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivVOPWrFfW4), to know just what Trump and his mob are capable of, and have done



Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on February 10, 2021, 03:51:14 PM
Things I learned today: (I watched nearly the whole show.)

Not a single one of Trump's supporters knows how to spell the word cavalry. They seem to get it confused with a hill in Palestine.

Trump is essentially a cop killer.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on February 10, 2021, 10:48:37 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on February 10, 2021, 03:51:14 PM
Trump is essentially a cop killer.

As I have said many times, Trump relishes in other people dying violently or miserably.

It;s the narcissist's zerosum joie de vivre. He only enjoys life when other people are miserable.

His final act in that domain were the record nr of lame duck executions.

(I'm not saying he killed lame ducks.)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on February 11, 2021, 02:17:45 AM
Quote from: Herman on February 10, 2021, 10:48:37 PM
(I'm not saying he killed lame ducks.)

Killing lame ducks could be considered an act of mercy, a concept unknown to Trump...  :P
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on February 11, 2021, 03:43:42 AM
I have to admit that after watching the trial today I felt something more depressing than usual about this topic. It was the feeling that I no longer want to talk to people that disagree over this. That's a very sad thing and it's not a feeling of hope. We need competition in politics and to be able to imagine living together at the end of the day. People are going to have different points of view at the same job or school, even in the same family or house. I think we've really lost something in this and I think trump accomplished something, not by offering any set of ideas or ideals but just by embodying resentment. He very masterfully reduced the level of what is possible to talk about politically and what it's possible to agree on or accomplish in public life. He's split people up but nothing is gained by anyone really - unless you think confusion and disaffection serves a greater good.   
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on February 11, 2021, 04:18:25 AM
Well, the rich would consider tax cuts for the rich a gain.

However, the rift in society, even in families, has been there much longer.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on February 11, 2021, 05:05:14 AM
Quote from: Handelian on February 11, 2021, 03:29:21 AM
No one seems to be mentioning the unarmed woman who was shot dead. One assumes she didn't matter?

The capitol police would have been justified in shooting every one of the insurrectionists posing a threat to members of congress. Ashli Babbit mattered because shooting her slowed the assault on the House Chamber and allowed legislators time to escape. As can be seen at 9:10 in in the impeachment managers' video, Babbit, who had military training, was shot because she was the first person through the breach created by breaking windows of the House Chamber door:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThFsZ_9P78U&bpctr=1613058301
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on February 11, 2021, 05:19:33 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on February 11, 2021, 05:05:14 AM
The capitol police would have been justified in shooting every one of the insurrectionists posing a threat to members of congress. Ashli Babbit mattered because shooting her slowed the assault on the senate floor and allowed legislators time to escape.
Her death was caused by trump. She is a kind of victim in a way.
Quote from: Herman on February 11, 2021, 04:18:25 AM
Well, the rich would consider tax cuts for the rich a gain.

However, the rift in society, even in families, has been there much longer.
That kind of thing has always caused disagreement. One can even argue that Reagan and Bush were much worse. But, I could discuss this with people who felt differently. A lot of Dems voted Reagan for various reasons. It was a policy debate and I would say Reagan and Bush did much more tangible damage. Trump isn't about policy. It's about reality vs. some kind of delusion. The whole thing is very shallow and weird. But to me, the events at the Capitol are not something to reasonably disagree about. Trump's people will tell you straight out that trump knows what he's saying to whom and for what. These people are not an accident of fate, nor is it difficult to explain. Trump created chaos and violence by building up the delusion and resentment day by day and step by step.     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mandryka on February 11, 2021, 05:43:37 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 10, 2021, 03:46:58 PM
Had to watch this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivVOPWrFfW4), to know just what Trump and his mob are capable of, and have done

Thanks for this.

It's not my country, I'm one step removed, so although I followed the events it was a bit distant. This video made me realise for the first time what a shocking thing it was. 

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on February 11, 2021, 05:46:01 AM
Quote from: milk on February 11, 2021, 05:19:33 AM
Her death was caused by trump. She is a kind of victim in a way.   

I'd say this is true to a great extent. But at some point people have to take personal responsibility for the ideas they choose to credit and act upon. It's called being an adult.

In other news: Trump is almost surely going to be indicted for election interference and other violations in Georgia. His call to Brad Raffensberger is all the evidence anyone should need. He could be jailed for this.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on February 11, 2021, 06:11:30 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on February 11, 2021, 05:46:01 AM
I'd say this is true to a great extent. But at some point people have to take personal responsibility for the ideas they choose to credit and act upon. It's called being an adult.

In other news: Trump is almost surely going to be indicted for election fraud and other violations in Georgia. His call to Brad Raffensberger is all the evidence anyone should need. He could be jailed for this.

As many observers have noted, these assailants were having the time of their life. It's obviously a huge adrenalin rush to be part of such massive act of aggression, being a part in a human machine. Breaking stuff, scaring cops, yelling all together you're going to kill / hang various folks you only know from TV.

Like I said, I suspect many of these people were aided by cocaine or other aggression-enhancing drugs.

The 'unarmed woman' was part of exactly such a group who was going to get hold of Congress members and hold them accountable in a physical way. If she was not armed, the next man was. She was warned there was a gun pointed at her group, and she kept on trying to break down the doors. She must have been deliriously happy at her heroic persistence.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Que on February 11, 2021, 07:43:13 AM
Quote from: Handelian on February 11, 2021, 03:29:21 AM
No one seems to be mentioning the unarmed woman who was shot dead. One assumes she didn't matter?

I believe people are shot in the US for much less than invading the buildings of parliament and interrupting its proceedings, much less.... And frequently in the back too, without warning.

But I admit she was a victim as well, of Trump...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on February 11, 2021, 08:13:45 AM
Quote from: Herman on February 11, 2021, 06:11:30 AM
The 'unarmed woman' was part of exactly such a group who was going to get hold of Congress members and hold them accountable in a physical way. If she was not armed, the next man was. She was warned there was a gun pointed at her group, and she kept on trying to break down the doors. She must have been deliriously happy at her heroic persistence.

I see it as a miracle that more firearms didn't turn up amongst the Capital insurrectionists.  I attribute that to Washington DC's not permitting of carrying guns;  I suspect those people understood that if they showed themselves with guns, the Washington city (Metropolitan) police would have immediately arrested them.  That was showing some good sense despite that various inciters were telling them that they ought to ignore DC's anti-gun laws.

Was the woman in question one of those who was dissuaded by DC law's?  Would she otherwise have brought a firearm?  Her death was part of the greater tragedy, but Capital Police were doing their duty to protect legislators from a violent mob.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on February 11, 2021, 11:01:11 AM
Quote from: Handelian on February 11, 2021, 09:56:05 AM
Great! Shooting unarmed women is justified in your book. You approve of killing then? Doesn't surprise me. But  of course you will be one of those people who is urging gun-control

Are you blind? Every one of the insurrectionists by that door was armed! Like the others, they had been beating police officers with anything they could get their hands on. In any case, whether or not she was armed is irrelevant. That was the door to the House Chambers being broken down. That officer squared up to put a bullet in the first person through the door because that was the only hope of stopping them and it's unlikely he knew whether or not members of congress were safe yet. He was absolutely right and possibly duty bound to shoot her.

But to answer more broadly: Yes, I completely approve of killing insurrectionists bent on violence. I believe the officers should have responded much earlier with deadly force. By their restraint they were cutting it really close, as we all now know by how narrow the margin of escape was for the elected officials. I think the officers should have shot every person coming through the windows until the rest backed off or they were out of ammunition, whichever came first.

And yes I'm for gun control! You think it's a good idea that deranged terrorists like those who stormed the capitol should be allowed to have guns?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 11, 2021, 11:34:29 AM
He may be medically incapable of arguing in good faith....
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on February 11, 2021, 05:15:12 PM
Dozens of former Republican officials in talks to form anti-Trump party
Breakaway group would run on 'principled conservatism' platform, say those involved in discussions (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/feb/11/dozens-former-republican-officials-talks-form-anti-trump-party)


also via the Guardian:

Texas lawyer, trapped by cat filter on Zoom call, informs judge he is not a cat
Lawyer Rod Ponton unable to undo filter during court debate (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/feb/09/texas-lawyer-zoom-cat-filter-kitten)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on February 12, 2021, 03:23:23 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on February 11, 2021, 05:15:12 PM
Dozens of former Republican officials in talks to form anti-Trump party
Breakaway group would run on 'principled conservatism' platform, say those involved in discussions (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/feb/11/dozens-former-republican-officials-talks-form-anti-trump-party)


also via the Guardian:

Texas lawyer, trapped by cat filter on Zoom call, informs judge he is not a cat
Lawyer Rod Ponton unable to undo filter during court debate (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/feb/09/texas-lawyer-zoom-cat-filter-kitten)
Re:  the Republicans--good for them and I think good for the country!

Re:  the kitten filter....yes, funny story!  Vandermolen posted it over in one of the cat threads.  :)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on February 12, 2021, 06:36:54 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on February 12, 2021, 03:23:23 AM
Re:  the kitten filter....yes, funny story!  Vandermolen posted it over in one of the cat threads.  :)

One of the cat threads?? How many do we have here?  :o
My sister posted the CATastrophal stream video to me yesterday...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on February 12, 2021, 08:25:33 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on February 12, 2021, 06:36:54 AM
One of the cat threads?? How many do we have here?  :o
My sister posted the CATastrophal stream video to me yesterday...
Two (as far as I've seen anyway):  1)  That Darn Cat Thread and 2)  The Cat Thread.  :)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on February 12, 2021, 01:08:25 PM
Wow, this Michael van der Veen is really a nasty piece of work.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on February 12, 2021, 01:52:00 PM
Quote from: Herman on February 12, 2021, 01:08:25 PM
Wow, this Michael van der Veen is really a nasty piece of work.

??? ?

8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on February 12, 2021, 02:02:10 PM
I'm not watching but I assume its the expected "both sides do it" and "they were all really Antifa" and "Democrats shouldn't have been so outraged at Trump's outrageous behavior thereby creating a climate of outrage".
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on February 12, 2021, 02:33:34 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on February 12, 2021, 02:02:10 PM
I'm not watching but I assume its the expected "both sides do it" and "they were all really Antifa" and "Democrats shouldn't have been so outraged at Trump's outrageous behavior thereby creating a climate of outrage".

The only viable objective for the defense was to provide a veneer of plausibility so that Republican senators could assuage their guilt for violating their oaths of office. They failed. All of the Republican senators know Trump is guilty and that they are selling out democracy. They don't care. They are craven careerist scum.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on February 12, 2021, 05:22:12 PM

     New details about Trump-McCarthy shouting match show Trump refused to call off the rioters (https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/12/politics/trump-mccarthy-shouting-match-details/index.html)

The newly revealed details of the call, described to CNN by multiple Republicans briefed on it, provide critical insight into the President's state of mind as rioters were overrunning the Capitol. The existence of the call and some of its details have been previously reported and discussed publicly by McCarthy.

The Republican members of Congress said the exchange showed Trump had no intention of calling off the rioters even as lawmakers were pleading with him to intervene. Several said it amounted to a dereliction of his presidential duty.

"He is not a blameless observer, he was rooting for them," a Republican member of Congress said. "On January 13, Kevin McCarthy said on the floor of the House that the President bears responsibility and he does."


Speaking to the President from inside the besieged Capitol, McCarthy pressed Trump to call off his supporters and engaged in a heated disagreement about who comprised the crowd. Trump's comment about the would-be insurrectionists caring more about the election results than McCarthy did was first mentioned by Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler, a Republican from Washington state, in a town hall earlier this week, and was confirmed to CNN by Herrera Beutler and other Republicans briefed on the conversation.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on February 12, 2021, 11:21:30 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on February 12, 2021, 02:02:10 PM
I'm not watching but I assume its the expected "both sides do it" and "they were all really Antifa" and "Democrats shouldn't have been so outraged at Trump's outrageous behavior thereby creating a climate of outrage".

I don't really follow actively US politics anymore (one can't avoid following passively). As far as I have understood there won't be enough votes to convict Trump so all of this is political theatre. The Republicans won't do the right thing - their power and political career are more important for them than the future of the country and the principles of law. So, I guess Trump will return to the White House in January 20, 2025. I am already depressed about that thought. All I can do is to try and "enjoy" these four years of the status quo manager named Biden before the lunacy returns...  ::)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: vandermolen on February 12, 2021, 11:46:28 PM
Someone on the BBC this morning was saying that although DT is unlikely to be convicted, the Impeachment process has helped to change public opinion further against him (things like the former US Ambassador to the UN saying that DT should 'never have gone down that road' and that 'we should never have followed him'). There was also discussion centring on the danger of DT standing again in 2024 and losing the election. There was also the suggestion that if things had got further out of control on 6th January it would have allowed Trump to declare martial law and presumably set himself up as some kind of dictator.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on February 13, 2021, 12:24:47 AM
Quote from: Herman on February 12, 2021, 01:08:25 PM
Wow, this Michael van der Veen is really a nasty piece of work.

This man is yet another "Only for TV" opportunistic republicans, shouting and yelling and acting out (and thus whipping up) anger in the audience.

It's five weeks after January 6th and they are at it full bore again.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on February 13, 2021, 06:12:31 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on February 12, 2021, 08:25:33 AM
Two (as far as I've seen anyway):  1)  That Darn Cat Thread and 2)  The Cat Thread.  :)

Time for "Sure, I look like one, but I am NOT a cat!" -thread for those with existential crisis.  :P
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 13, 2021, 06:49:26 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on February 12, 2021, 11:46:28 PM
Someone on the BBC this morning was saying that although DT is unlikely to be convicted, the Impeachment process has helped to change public opinion further against him (things like the former US Ambassador to the UN saying that DT should 'never have gone down that road' and that 'we should never have followed him'). There was also discussion centring on the danger of DT standing again in 2024 and losing the election. There was also the suggestion that if things had got further out of control on 6th January it would have allowed Trump to declare martial law and presumably set himself up as some kind of dictator.

Yes, for the public who are paying attention.  Also, Poju can take heart that it is not empty political theatre: although the Rubios & al. are trying to "memory-hole" this, all of Trump's seditious activity is now on the record.

(* typo *)

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 13, 2021, 06:56:50 AM
The Senate will call witnesses.  That is already an advance on Impeachment № 1
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on February 13, 2021, 06:57:14 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 13, 2021, 06:49:26 AM
...all of Trump's seditious activity is now on the record.

Does it matter it is now on the record?  :-\
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 13, 2021, 07:11:05 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on February 13, 2021, 06:57:14 AM
Does it matter it is now on the record?  :-\

I know it's a trying time, try to resist cynicism.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on February 13, 2021, 07:32:06 AM

     This is the witness the impeachment managers want to call.     

     (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EuEt4BiXIAAMg4O?format=png&name=small)

     There's no real doubt that Trump tried to disrupt the vote certification by telling armed violent extremists to fight like hell. There is no real doubt Trump knew exactly who was in the crowd.

     But what about fake doubt? What about Trump's sacred right to not know very much about who was in the crowd? By confirming that Trump had no intention of helping the people in the Capitol, testimony also confirms that Trump intended the result he got. What other reason could Trump have for refusing to immediately send help?

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on February 13, 2021, 08:06:25 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 13, 2021, 07:11:05 AM
I know it's a trying time, try to resist cynicism.

I don't think I can resist cynicism as long as the US doesn't have medicare for all. The US has failed so badly as a country it's now literally a battle between dictator wannabes and status quo managers. No chance for a FDR 2.0.  :-\
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on February 13, 2021, 08:13:14 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 13, 2021, 06:56:50 AM
The Senate will call witnesses.  That is already an advance on Impeachment № 1

The histrionics of this Philly lawyer are really stunning.

Why he thinks this constant display of his short fuse is winning him hearts and minds is baffling.

It's a performance for one viewer, back in Mar a Lago...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on February 13, 2021, 09:18:15 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on February 13, 2021, 06:57:14 AM
Does it matter it is now on the record?  :-\

Yes because you have to go through the motions so precedent is not set that anything a president does in their last month has zero consequences.  And remember that 140k people have left the Republican party in the last month. (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/10/us/politics/republicans-leaving-party.html)  The pro-Trumpers might win today, but forcing them to once again choose sedition , fascism and falsehood in the public eye will eventually do more damage.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 13, 2021, 10:45:16 AM
Of course, this is in deep-blue Massachusetts:

Time will reverse the probable impeachment verdict

History won't be kind to Trump's Senate supporters.
By Scot Lehigh Globe Columnist,Updated February 11, 2021, 5:17 p.m.

Time is a clear-eyed and unforgiving arbiter of fact and falsehood, integrity and ignominy, honor and dishonor. Thus my prediction: If, as expected, the US Senate acquits Donald Trump, in a few years, what constitutes victory and defeat in this second impeachment trial will look very different.

Republicans will wish they had officially consigned Trump to disgrace and rendered him ineligible to hold office again when they had an opportunity, rather than leaving him to maraud like a vengeful minotaur through their ranks.

Democrats, meanwhile, will watch the war that comes to consume the GOP over the fault line of loyalty to Trump and decide that, politically at least, they won by losing.

That's the dynamic set in motion by the powerful and revealing case the House impeachment managers have built about the scheming and dishonest former president, the web of falsehoods he spun about a stolen election, and the angry mob he helped rally in Washington and sent Congress's way in service of his Big Lie.

For much of the nation, the Jan. 6 storming of the Capitol will become a metaphor for Trumpism. One has to be deep in the clutches of conspiratorialism or a democracy-despising authoritarian — or an "alt-right" racist — to look approvingly upon the mob of violent, vicious, police-assaulting hooligans who ransacked the Capitol.

One can, of course, tell him or herself that this isn't what Trumpism is really all about — but only by dint of a determined effort to deny reality. This mob, after all, was part and parcel of the crowd that responded to Trump's call to come to the Capitol for a rally set to coincide with the congressional certification of the Electoral College results. These are the insurrectionists who, in response to his call to "fight like hell," then stormed the Capitol. This is the violent horde whose seditious attack on the Capitol Trump watched for an extended period without condemning, before finally telling them "we love you, you're very special" and asking them to go home.

Whether Trump is convicted or not, that reality won't change.

Even for those who follow the news closely, the presentation by the House impeachment managers was eye-opening. They cast new light on Trump's concerted effort to beckon his supporters to Washington for a rally on the day Congress met to certify the Electoral College results.

The video annotation of the storming of the Capitol illustrated in stark and stunning fashion the assaults on, and heroism of, the Capitol Police, and the very real threat to lawmakers. Thursday's presentation should have given any decent, empathic American a vivid sense of the trauma suffered by scores of patriotic, nonelected public servants, particularly those who are minorities.

What emerged was a clear portrait of a president who moved from one failed attempt to overturn the election to the next, until, as House manager Representative Ted Lieu of California put it, he "ran out of nonviolent options" to do so.

It will be difficult indeed for Trump's impeachment defense team to refute the case the House managers have made against Trump. Beyond the Senate, Trump defenders are trying to appeal to partisan solidarity by portraying impeachment as a Democratic desire for revenge. Yet the fact that Trump was directing his pressure campaign against both Republicans and Democrats undercuts that assertion, as does the fact that this mob broke into the Capitol with malice in mind toward elected officials of both parties. It wasn't just House Speaker Nancy Pelosi they were searching for but also Vice President Mike Pence. Indeed, the videos with chants of "Hang Mike Pence" and "Bring out Pence" are particularly chilling in light of the hurried and narrow escape Pence and his family made.

Again, it's unlikely that the Senate will convict Trump, but not because he isn't guilty as charged. Not because he didn't tell and propagate the Big Lie. Not because he didn't call the mob to Washington. And not because he didn't whip them up and send them to the Capitol.

But because those who vote to acquit are cynics, cowards, and opportunists.

History will not be kind.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 13, 2021, 10:55:08 AM
On 'Hatred' and the Trump Impeachment

The trial isn't about Trump as a person. But it is just and wise to hate his wicked words and deeds. (https://thebulwark.com/on-hatred-and-the-trump-impeachment/)



So it is no sin to hate the words and deeds of Donald Trump. If you do not hate cruelty, deception, and violent chaos, what are you?

Trump and his acolytes have attempted to conflate hatred of the man's actions and what he stands for with hatred of his voters. That is false. Some of his voters are wicked, and their words and deeds merit hatred. But many are deluded. Trump's attempt to hide behind their skirts is yet another offense.

It is he who stirs the worst hatred—baseless hatred. He incites hatred of others based on lies—his opponents are child molesters, Muslim Americans danced in the streets after 9/11, immigrants are rapists and murderers, a landslide election victory was stolen. Those lies incite baseless hatred. They are evil. Shall we not hate these deceits and punish the deceiver?

"The fear of the Lord is to hate evil."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on February 13, 2021, 11:17:45 AM
Van der Veen is sight-reading his material, following the lines with a pen.

One of his constant things is telling Raskins he doesn't know constituational law and senate rules.

Raskins has taught constitutional law for 25 years and is a senator.

Van der Veen is an ambulance-chasing injury attorney.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on February 13, 2021, 11:22:06 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 13, 2021, 10:55:08 AM
On 'Hatred' and the Trump Impeachment

The trial isn't about Trump as a person. But it is just and wise to hate his wicked words and deeds. (https://thebulwark.com/on-hatred-and-the-trump-impeachment/)


So it is no sin to hate the words and deeds of Donald Trump. If you do not hate cruelty, deception, and violent chaos, what are you?

Trump and his acolytes have attempted to conflate hatred of the man's actions and what he stands for with hatred of his voters. That is false. Some of his voters are wicked, and their words and deeds merit hatred. But many are deluded. Trump's attempt to hide behind their skirts is yet another offense.

It is he who stirs the worst hatred—baseless hatred. He incites hatred of others based on lies—his opponents are child molesters, Muslim Americans danced in the streets after 9/11, immigrants are rapists and murderers, a landslide election victory was stolen. Those lies incite baseless hatred. They are evil. Shall we not hate these deceits and punish the deceiver?

"The fear of the Lord is to hate evil."

Can't say I agree:  one may well "hate" (or despise or choose your word) the man.  It was clear long before his announcing his candidacy.  He is a life-long con-man as evidenced by his business career.  Further more, in my layman's diagnosis, he is a sociopath and pathological narcissist.  With these characteristic it was predictable that he would lack genuine regard for others, and -- worse -- that his apprehension of the truth and judgement would deeply flawed.

In the end his sociopathy and narcissism resulted in his sincere belief that the election results was fraudulent.  BUT that belief doesn't absolve him guilt for his seditious promotion of the BIG LIE of the stolen election.  No leader can commit a worse crime than illegitimately undermining faith in a valid electoral process.  It wasn't Trump words on January 6th that were the primary incitement:  it was the BIG LIE that gave his duped supporters the license to insurrection.  This lie began months before the election and persists today.

Want to hate Trump?  Feel free:  he is worthy of hatred.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: vandermolen on February 13, 2021, 11:50:07 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on February 13, 2021, 06:12:31 AM
Time for "Sure, I look like one, but I am NOT a cat!" -thread for those with existential crisis.  :P
Brilliant idea!  ;D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on February 13, 2021, 11:53:14 AM
43-57, Trump has been found to be not-guilty and has been acquitted of inciting an insurrection.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: ritter on February 13, 2021, 12:03:54 PM
Eppur si muove.....  ::)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on February 13, 2021, 12:06:18 PM
Quote from: ritter on February 13, 2021, 12:03:54 PM
Eppur si muove.....  ::)
Sorry, but I don't know your reference--and translation?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: ritter on February 13, 2021, 12:11:49 PM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on February 13, 2021, 12:06:18 PM
Sorry, but I don't know your reference--and translation?
"And yet it moves"
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_yet_it_moves

Good evening, PD.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on February 13, 2021, 12:45:01 PM
Quote from: Herman on February 13, 2021, 12:24:47 AM
This man is yet another "Only for TV" opportunistic republicans, shouting and yelling and acting out (and thus whipping up) anger in the audience.

It's five weeks after January 6th and they are at it full bore again.

I'm afraid you're giving the man too much credit. He's just an ambulance chaser from Philadelphia hoping to raise his profile among insurance scammers, a bottom feeder hoping for a little more chum to fall into the depths of his squalor and obscurity — exactly the kind of lawyer Trump deserves and exactly the kind Trump will never pay. Imagine the humiliation of republican senators who now must pretend they were persuaded by this specimen.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on February 13, 2021, 12:48:32 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on February 13, 2021, 12:45:01 PM
I'm afraid you're giving the man too much credit. He's just an ambulance chaser from Philadelphia hoping to raise his profile among insurance scammers, a bottom feeder hoping for a little more chum to fall into the depths of his squalor and obscurity — exactly the kind of lawyer Trump deserves and exactly the kind Trump will never pay. Imagine the humiliation of republican senators who now must pretend they were persuaded by this specimen.

[Emphasis added] I doubt it. If I were to draw a Venn diagram as a thought experiment, the circles labeled (GOP Legislators) and (susceptible to feeling shame) would have a null intersection.  :'( :laugh:
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on February 13, 2021, 12:53:46 PM
Ellie Bartlett: "It's apocryphal, Dad. A story for tourists. If Galileo had muttered 'it still moves' after they made him recant his life's work they would have killed him on the spot."

from the episode titled Eppur Si Muove
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Brahmsian on February 13, 2021, 01:17:00 PM
7 Republicans did the right thing. Out of 50. Not a very hopeful or promising sign (although also not surprising).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on February 13, 2021, 01:19:18 PM
Quote from: ritter on February 13, 2021, 12:11:49 PM
"And yet it moves"
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_yet_it_moves

Good evening, PD.
O.k., so state your position/comments further.  What do you believe is going on...and quit the quotes please.

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on February 13, 2021, 02:20:10 PM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on February 13, 2021, 01:19:18 PM
O.k., so state your position/comments further.  What do you believe is going on...and quit the quotes please.

PD

I think the analogy would be:

"He's acquitted by his loyalists", but...

..."He's still guilty."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: premont on February 13, 2021, 02:32:28 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on February 13, 2021, 02:20:10 PM

"He's acquitted by his loyalists", but...

..."He's still guilty."

That is the paradox of a political court. He could easily have been found guilty in a legal court.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on February 13, 2021, 02:42:01 PM
omward...

In Georgia, a New District Attorney Starts Circling Trump and His Allies
Fani Willis has opened a criminal investigation into efforts by the Trump camp to overturn the former president's loss in Georgia. In an interview, Ms. Willis described a wide-ranging inquiry. (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/13/us/politics/fani-willis-trump.html)

"After six weeks as a district attorney, Fani T. Willis is taking on a former president.

And not just that. In an interview about her newly announced criminal investigation into election interference in Georgia, Ms. Willis, the district attorney of Fulton County, made it clear that the scope of her inquiry would encompass the pressure campaign on state officials by former President Donald J. Trump as well as the activities of his allies.

"An investigation is like an onion," she said. "You never know. You pull something back, and then you find something else."

She added, "Anything that is relevant to attempts to interfere with the Georgia election will be subject to review."

Ms. Willis, whose jurisdiction encompasses much of Atlanta, has suddenly become a new player in the post-presidency of Mr. Trump. She will decide whether to bring criminal charges over Mr. Trump's phone call to Georgia's secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, asking him to "find" votes to erase the former president's loss there, and other efforts by Trump allies to overturn the election results. The severity of the legal threat to Mr. Trump is not yet clear, but Ms. Willis has started laying out some details about the inquiry.
She and her office have indicated that the investigation will include Senator Lindsey Graham's phone call to Mr. Raffensperger in November about mail-in ballots; the abrupt removal last month of Byung J. Pak, the U.S. attorney for the Northern District of Georgia, who earned Mr. Trump's enmity for not advancing his debunked assertions about election fraud; and the false claims that Rudolph W. Giuliani, the president's personal lawyer, made before state legislative committees.

She laid out an array of possible criminal charges in letters sent to state officials and agencies asking them to preserve documents, providing a partial map of the potential exposure of Mr. Trump and his allies. Mr. Trump's calls to state officials urging them to subvert the election, for instance, could run afoul of a Georgia statute dealing with "criminal solicitation to commit election fraud," (https://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2016/title-21/chapter-2/article-15/section-21-2-604) one of the charges outlined in the letters, which if prosecuted as a felony is punishable by at least a year in prison."

The misinformation spread by Mr. Giuliani could prove problematic, as Ms. Willis said in her letters that she would review "the making of false statements to state and local governmental bodies." Georgia law bars "any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement" within "the jurisdiction of any department or agency of state government." (https://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2010/title-16/chapter-10/article-2/16-10-20)

Ms. Willis is also open to considering not just conspiracy but racketeering charges. As she put it in the interview, racketeering could apply to anyone who uses a legal entity — presumably anything from a government agency to that person's own public office — to conduct overt acts for an illegal purpose. In this case, it applies to the pressure the president and his allies exerted on Georgia officials to overturn the election.[...]
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on February 13, 2021, 10:36:03 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on February 13, 2021, 12:45:01 PM
I'm afraid you're giving the man too much credit. He's just an ambulance chaser from Philadelphia hoping to raise his profile among insurance scammers, a bottom feeder hoping for a little more chum to fall into the depths of his squalor and obscurity — exactly the kind of lawyer Trump deserves and exactly the kind Trump will never pay. Imagine the humiliation of republican senators who now must pretend they were persuaded by this specimen.

I know he's just a personal injury attorney, way out of his depth, but he did get hours of national (make that international) TV. You may or may not have noticed that on his second day he stopped addressing the senate and started talking to the camera directly, opening with "Good morning, America," or some such megalomaniac absurdity.

The intriguing thing about guys like this is his unashamed embracing his worst instincts and glorifying in them. His snarling nastiness, the desk pounding, the constant putting down of "the other side," who just happened to have 25 years of experience in studying and teaching constitutional law (in other words, the now familiar "I'm not going to let the experts tell me anything"). The way he put the clock back full cycle as if January 6th has never happened, or, if it did, it was GOOD, speaks volumes about where the country is going. I don't know what money he's making in the dog-bite business, but I would not be surprised if he'll cross over into national GOP elective politics if the donors pony up. He could be the Pennsylvania version of Ted Cruz.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Que on February 14, 2021, 01:02:07 AM
McConnell after the vote:

"There's no question that president Trump is practically and morally responsible for provoking the events of the day"

Well he had his chance to get rid of Trump and save the traditional conservative identity of the Republican Party, but was obviously afraid that it would blow up in his face. I guess all things considered, it was already too late and traditionalists have lost control. Unless some miracle happens and Trump becomes ill or dies, he will run again in four years and drive the GOP of the cliff.

Q
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: The new erato on February 14, 2021, 01:11:45 AM
He tries to ride two horses to secure reelection of Republican senators. The important thing is not to alienate trumpists as well as moderates. Other things doesn't matter in the equation. Remember; reelection with all the money that comes with it, are the most important thing.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 14, 2021, 05:51:46 AM
Quote from: Que on February 14, 2021, 01:02:07 AM
McConnell after the vote:

"There's no question that president Trump is practically and morally responsible for provoking the events of the day"

Well he had his chance to get rid of Trump and save the traditional conservative identity of the Republican Party, but was obviously afraid that it would blow up in his face. I guess all things considered, it was already too late and traditionalists have lost control. Unless some miracle happens and Trump becomes ill or dies, he will run again in four years and drive the GOP of the cliff.

Q

Let the Reublicans' moral contortions begin [anew]
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on February 14, 2021, 07:17:43 AM
Quote from: The new erato on February 14, 2021, 01:11:45 AM
He tries to ride two horses to secure reelection of Republican senators. The important thing is not to alienate trumpists as well as moderates. Other things doesn't matter in the equation. Remember; reelection with all the money that comes with it, are the most important thing.

The Republican Party for the last 40 years at least is bifurcated party.  On the one hand, financial conservatives, mostly upper-middle class or corporations  wanting lower taxes and less regulation i.e. "the moderates".  On the other hand, social conservatives and, (increasingly), mostly White, mostly lower-middle class, mostly rural people who feel "dispossessed" by secular trends in the economy and society, i.e. the "Trumpists" and alt-Right.

There is really no fundamental commonality between these two groups.  However the first and previously more powerful Republican constituency, the financial conservatives, understand that they have no hope of power without coopting additional support from some other voter elements.  Especially since the Nixon era "southern strategy" Republican strategists have convinced the second group, the social conservatives and discontented lower-middle class that they have mort to offer them than the Democratic Party.  Despite that this is essentially a fraud, they have be successful at least 'till now.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on February 14, 2021, 07:42:25 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on February 14, 2021, 07:17:43 AM
The Republican Party for the last 40 years at least is bifurcated party.  On the one hand, financial conservatives, mostly upper-middle class or corporations  wanting lower taxes and less regulation i.e. "the moderates".  On the other hand, social conservatives and, (increasingly), mostly White, mostly lower-middle class, mostly rural people who feel "dispossessed" by secular trends in the economy and society, i.e. the "Trumpists" and alt-Right.

There is really no fundamental commonality between these two groups.  However the first and previously more powerful Republican constituency, the financial conservatives, understand that they have no hope of power without coopting additional support from some other voter elements.  Especially since the Nixon era "southern strategy" Republican strategists have convinced the second group, the social conservatives and discontented lower-middle class that they have more to offer them than the Democratic Party. Despite that this is essentially a fraud, they have be successful at least 'till now.

[Emphasis added] LBJ knew and acknowledged that after his civil rights legislation the Democratic Party was going to die in the South.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on February 14, 2021, 07:46:45 AM
Quote from: Herman on February 13, 2021, 11:17:45 AM
Van der Veen is sight-reading his material, following the lines with a pen.

One of his constant things is telling Raskins he doesn't know constituational law and senate rules.

Raskins has taught constitutional law for 25 years and is a senator.

Van der Veen is an ambulance-chasing injury attorney.

Unbelievable.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_van_der_Veen

It's surprising (or maybe not?  ???) that Cheeto Mussolini couldn't obtain reputable counsel.
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-02-14/trump-was-not-convicted-but-he-was-repudiated

...The shoddy defense that Trump mounted was a direct consequence of that split: Not a single high-profile Republican lawyer was willing to join the defense team, which on Saturday was down to a single personal-injury lawyer delivering campaign-type screeds that may well have cost Trump two or three Republican votes. 1

That's remarkable. Even Richard Nixon, when he was probably down to one dozen or two dozen Republican defenders in the House and Senate combined, was able to retain competent counsel right up to his resignation and the end of his presidency...


1 Most notably, Trump's lawyer was dismissive and condescending toward Louisiana Republican Bill Cassidy when he asked a question during the Q&A session on Friday. Cassidy, thought to be a swing vote before that, might not have based his eventual "guilty" decision on that attitude ... but it's not hard to believe that a U.S. senator might react negatively to being treated that way.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on February 14, 2021, 08:26:13 AM
Quote from: T. D. on February 14, 2021, 07:46:45 AM
Unbelievable.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_van_der_Veen

"He represented a man who claimed to have been served a fried rat."

I guess one could say he changed to defending the fried rat now.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on February 14, 2021, 10:48:40 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on February 13, 2021, 02:20:10 PM
I think the analogy would be:

"He's acquitted by his loyalists", but...

..."He's still guilty."

Thank you gents for the explanation.   :)

PD

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 16, 2021, 12:03:46 PM
Trump Didn't Just Lose Swing Voters—the GOP Did as Well (https://thebulwark.com/trump-didnt-just-lose-swing-voters-the-gop-did-as-well/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on February 18, 2021, 07:19:19 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/18/ted-cruz-cancun-texas-winter-storm.html

Social media erupted with multiple photos purportedly showing Sen. Ted Cruz flying to Mexico even as millions of his fellow Texans froze because of historically low temperatures and widespread power outages.
Later images showed someone with the Republican Cruz's last name and first initial standing by for a flight from Cancun back to Houston.
Cruz, an ardent backer of ex-President Donald Trump who had mocked power outages in California weeks ago, on Tuesday tweeted, "I got no defense. A blizzard strikes Texas & our state shuts down. Not good."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: geralmar on February 18, 2021, 10:32:13 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on February 14, 2021, 07:17:43 AM
The Republican Party for the last 40 years at least is bifurcated party.  On the one hand, financial conservatives, mostly upper-middle class or corporations  wanting lower taxes and less regulation i.e. "the moderates".  On the other hand, social conservatives and, (increasingly), mostly White, mostly lower-middle class, mostly rural people who feel "dispossessed" by secular trends in the economy and society, i.e. the "Trumpists" and alt-Right.

There is really no fundamental commonality between these two groups.  However the first and previously more powerful Republican constituency, the financial conservatives, understand that they have no hope of power without coopting additional support from some other voter elements.  Especially since the Nixon era "southern strategy" Republican strategists have convinced the second group, the social conservatives and discontented lower-middle class that they have mort to offer them than the Democratic Party.  Despite that this is essentially a fraud, they have be successful at least 'till now.

Nixon's mantra was "Run to the right, govern to the middle".  We've seen how that worked out.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on February 18, 2021, 10:52:57 AM
Quote from: T. D. on February 18, 2021, 07:19:19 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/18/ted-cruz-cancun-texas-winter-storm.html

Social media erupted with multiple photos purportedly showing Sen. Ted Cruz flying to Mexico even as millions of his fellow Texans froze because of historically low temperatures and widespread power outages.
Later images showed someone with the Republican Cruz's last name and first initial standing by for a flight from Cancun back to Houston.
Cruz, an ardent backer of ex-President Donald Trump who had mocked power outages in California weeks ago, on Tuesday tweeted, "I got no defense. A blizzard strikes Texas & our state shuts down. Not good."
Yup, what timing.  I suspect that his wife stayed there and he's hoping to be able to rejoin her soon.  Besides the poor people freezing, I heard a bit of a news story about animal shelters and sanctuaries struggling with some of their charges freezing to death too.  :'(  Here's one story:  https://www.kfyrtv.com/2021/02/18/animals-at-primate-sanctuary-freeze-amid-texas-power-outage/

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on February 18, 2021, 01:10:36 PM
Some current news on Trump and trying to figure out what is going on for him legally currently:  https://www.bbc.com/news/world/us_and_canada

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on February 19, 2021, 07:13:34 PM
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-investigation-subpoena-excl/exclusive-new-york-city-tax-agency-subpoenaed-in-trump-criminal-probe-idUSKBN2AK037?il=0

Exclusive: New York City tax agency subpoenaed in Trump criminal probe
By Peter Eisler, Jason Szep

(Reuters) - The Manhattan District Attorney's Office has subpoenaed a New York City property tax agency as part of a criminal investigation into Donald Trump's company, the agency confirmed on Friday, suggesting prosecutors are examining the former president's efforts to reduce his commercial real-estate taxes for possible evidence of fraud.


Along with information already subpoenaed from creditors, the tax agency documents would help investigators determine whether Trump's business inflated the value of his properties to secure favorable terms on loans while deflating those values to lower tax bills for those same properties.


This is a smart move by the DA.
I know something about tax assessment (work part-time in the field), and have always wondered why this angle wasn't discussed in the media. I'd have bet dollars to donuts that Cheeto Mussolini was overstating property values to lenders and banks while "grieving his assessments" (arguing that the very same properties were overassessed) to municipal governments.  :laugh: Obvious contradiction.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 19, 2021, 07:27:59 PM
Quote from: T. D. on February 19, 2021, 07:13:34 PM
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-investigation-subpoena-excl/exclusive-new-york-city-tax-agency-subpoenaed-in-trump-criminal-probe-idUSKBN2AK037?il=0

Exclusive: New York City tax agency subpoenaed in Trump criminal probe
By Peter Eisler, Jason Szep

(Reuters) - The Manhattan District Attorney's Office has subpoenaed a New York City property tax agency as part of a criminal investigation into Donald Trump's company, the agency confirmed on Friday, suggesting prosecutors are examining the former president's efforts to reduce his commercial real-estate taxes for possible evidence of fraud.


Along with information already subpoenaed from creditors, the tax agency documents would help investigators determine whether Trump's business inflated the value of his properties to secure favorable terms on loans while deflating those values to lower tax bills for those same properties.


This is a smart move by the DA.
I know something about tax assessment (work part-time in the field), and have always wondered why this angle wasn't discussed in the media. I'd have bet dollars to donuts that Cheeto Mussolini was overstating property values to lenders and banks while "grieving his assessments" (arguing that the very same properties were overassessed) to municipal governments.  :laugh: Obvious contradiction.

Sweet! Let his pathetic arse be nailed!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on February 19, 2021, 09:08:08 PM
Probably, "marriage of convenience" is more prevalent in the D Party. Possibly the D Party has much broader constituents with diverse interests.
To make it short, the Single member district system with winner take all rule discourages multi party system with third, fourth parties.
Consequently, there are two parties, and the both are broad alliances of unique interest groups.


Quote from: Fëanor on February 14, 2021, 07:17:43 AM

There is really no fundamental commonality between these two groups.  However the first and previously more powerful Republican constituency, the financial conservatives, understand that they have no hope of power without coopting additional support from some other voter elements.  Especially since the Nixon era "southern strategy" Republican strategists have convinced the second group, the social conservatives and discontented lower-middle class that they have mort to offer them than the Democratic Party.  Despite that this is essentially a fraud, they have be successful at least 'till now.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on February 20, 2021, 05:06:27 AM
Quote from: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on February 19, 2021, 09:08:08 PM
Probably, "marriage of convenience" is more prevalent in the D Party. Possibly the D Party has much broader constituents with diverse interests.
To make it short, the Single member district system with winner take all rule discourages multi party system with third, fourth parties.
Consequently, there are two parties, and the both are broad alliances of unique interest groups.

Well that's a good point.  District "Winner take all", (a.k.a. 'First past the post'), is a factor in the US 2-party system but it isn't the only factor, IMHO.

Canada too "enjoys" a first-past-the-post system yet here we have as many as five parties competing a federal election, (viz. Liberal, Conservative, NDP, Green, and Bloc Quebecois).  That is winner-take-all / first-past-the-post is not the only reason for the US's strict two-party system.

I suggest a major factor is the USA's four-way 'checks and balances' constitutional structure;  (Executive, Congress -- further split HofR / Senate, Judiciary).  It's hard enough to get anything done under this structure with only 2 parties, let alone if there were additional parties into the mix.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 20, 2021, 09:28:55 AM
Chris & Ted in the sun
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 20, 2021, 09:30:44 AM
Off-camera is a small sign: Please do not aim at the Presidential Medal of Freedom
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on February 20, 2021, 09:38:37 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 19, 2021, 07:27:59 PM
Sweet! Let his pathetic arse be nailed!

The nice thing about that is that it is easy to prove, it's all documents, and they do not lend themselves (pun intended) to interpretation or obfuscation. This will be Al Capone all over again. His failure to know that history even exists will finally catch up with him, I think. :D

8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 20, 2021, 10:01:39 AM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on February 20, 2021, 09:38:37 AM
The nice thing about that is that it is easy to prove, it's all documents, and they do not lend themselves (pun intended) to interpretation or obfuscation. This will be Al Capone all over again. His failure to know that history even exists will finally catch up with him, I think. :D

8)

Indeed. The courts have already repeatedly rebuffed his team's "But, Your Honor, we FEEL that THESE are the facts" rubbish.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on February 22, 2021, 06:47:49 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/22/supreme-court-rejects-trump-effort-to-shield-tax-records-from-ny-prosecutors.html

The Supreme Court on Monday rejected a last-ditch bid by former President Donald Trump to keep his financial records, including years of his tax returns, out of the hands of the Manhattan district attorney, Cyrus Vance Jr.

The decision, the second time the nation's highest court has refused to block a grand jury subpoena for those confidential records, was announced in an order with no noted dissents.

The news further imperils the ex-president, who is facing investigations in New York and elsewhere.

The legal battle over Trump's financial records, including personal and business documents dating to 2011, comes in connection with an investigation by Vance's office into potential tax violations involving the Trump Organization.

Vance's probe originally appeared to have been focused on hush money payments made on Trump's behalf to two women who have said they had affairs with him. Trump has denied their claims.

But court records and news reports suggest prosecutors are now examining more serious allegations.

A court filing last summer by Vance indicated that the probe could be eyeing possible "insurance and bank fraud by the Trump Organization and its officers." In another filing, a month later, prosecutor suggested they might be investigating Trump for potential tax crimes.

Trump's former personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, told Congress in 2019 that Trump improperly inflated and deflated the value of his real estate assets for tax and insurance purposes.

Vance's filings appeared to reference Cohen's testimony. One filing by prosecutors cited a  New York Times report Trump engaged in "dubious tax schemes during the 1990s, including instances of outright fraud."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 22, 2021, 06:59:54 AM
Burn the career fraudster's arse!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on February 22, 2021, 07:00:37 AM
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-02-22/trump-allies-rejected-by-u-s-supreme-court-on-election-appeals

The U.S. Supreme Court rejected appeals filed in December to try to overturn President Joe Biden's election victories in five key states, marking the end of cases that sought to keep Donald Trump in the White House.

The justices without comment Monday turned away appeals that challenged the results in Georgia, Arizona, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin. The cases included two filed by Trump himself and others pressed by his Republican allies.

The high court signaled months ago it wasn't interested in hearing the appeals, which claimed without foundation that Biden's wins were the product of widespread fraud, caused in part by the use of mail-in ballots. The court previously refused to issue emergency orders in the cases or put them on a fast track.

The justices also refused to take up a narrower case from the 2020 election centering on Pennsylvania mail ballots. Republicans said the Pennsylvania Supreme Court usurped its authority by ordering a three-day extension of the Election Day deadline for ballots to arrive because of the pandemic and expected mail delays.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on February 22, 2021, 07:16:06 AM
Quote from: T. D. on February 22, 2021, 06:47:49 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/22/supreme-court-rejects-trump-effort-to-shield-tax-records-from-ny-prosecutors.html

The Supreme Court on Monday rejected a last-ditch bid by former President Donald Trump to keep his financial records, including years of his tax returns, out of the hands of the Manhattan district attorney, Cyrus Vance Jr.

The decision, the second time the nation's highest court has refused to block a grand jury subpoena for those confidential records, was announced in an order with no noted dissents.

The news further imperils the ex-president, who is facing investigations in New York and elsewhere.

Yeah!  :)

Quote from: T. D. on February 22, 2021, 07:00:37 AM
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-02-22/trump-allies-rejected-by-u-s-supreme-court-on-election-appeals

The U.S. Supreme Court rejected appeals filed in December to try to overturn President Joe Biden's election victories in five key states, marking the end of cases that sought to keep Donald Trump in the White House.

The justices without comment Monday turned away appeals that challenged the results in Georgia, Arizona, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin. The cases included two filed by Trump himself and others pressed by his Republican allies.

The high court signaled months ago it wasn't interested in hearing the appeals, which claimed without foundation that Biden's wins were the product of widespread fraud, caused in part by the use of mail-in ballots. The court previously refused to issue emergency orders in the cases or put them on a fast track.

The justices also refused to take up a narrower case from the 2020 election centering on Pennsylvania mail ballots. Republicans said the Pennsylvania Supreme Court usurped its authority by ordering a three-day extension of the Election Day deadline for ballots to arrive because of the pandemic and expected mail delays.

I had thought that all of those legal election lawsuits had already been settled?

Concerned about some of the stories that I've been hearing on the news lately about some states changing election laws trying to make it harder for people to vote.  Found this article for example.  I had heard the news via NPR recently.  https://americanindependent.com/florida-georgia-gop-voting-by-mail-absentee-suppression-donald-trump-2020-election/

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: bhodges on February 22, 2021, 07:22:55 AM
Watching the Garland confirmation hearing, which I hope many people are doing. One of the biggest lessons from the last four years: People are woefully underinformed about our political process.

--Bruce
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on February 22, 2021, 07:27:43 AM
Quote from: Brewski on February 22, 2021, 07:22:55 AM
Watching the Garland confirmation hearing, which I hope many people are doing. One of the biggest lessons from the last four years: People are woefully underinformed about our political process.

--Bruce
Thank you for the reminder; however, it looks like they're due to take a break now.  Will have to check back in later.

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 23, 2021, 07:12:33 AM
Quote from: geralmar on February 22, 2021, 10:16:23 PM
The Pennsylvania case was particularly offensive because for decades Republicans have shrilly championed "States Rights".

Republicans have 86-ed everything they once believed in, out of lust for power at any moral price.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on February 23, 2021, 07:26:50 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 23, 2021, 07:12:33 AM
Republicans have 86-ed everything they once believed in, out of lust for power at any moral price.
It's very sad and disheartening to see.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on February 24, 2021, 10:18:35 AM
Quote from: geralmar on February 23, 2021, 01:13:40 PM
The "Best People":

(https://i.postimg.cc/Fsg65fgg/C7-DD98-B7-EDEB-4-D2-A-A2-D2-43-D436-CFA6-CD.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

Update:  The attacker is in custody.  He is a retired New York City policeman.

He certainly gives 'New York's finest' a bad name.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: vandermolen on February 24, 2021, 11:40:04 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on February 24, 2021, 10:18:35 AM
He certainly gives 'New York's finest' a bad name.
+1 How horrible.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on February 24, 2021, 12:43:21 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on February 24, 2021, 10:18:35 AM
He certainly gives 'New York's finest' a bad name.

Hurray for the FBI.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on February 24, 2021, 02:56:13 PM
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-56190814

South Dakota lawmakers have launched a bid to remove the state's attorney general from office after authorities say he fatally hit a man with his car.

Jason Ravnsborg has said he thought he had struck a deer and did not know it was a man until one day later.

Newly released video shows agents telling Mr Ravnsborg the victim's glasses were found in his car, and that "his face was in your windshield".

The Republican faces three misdemeanour charges and months in prison.

He has resisted calls to resign, including from South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem, who called on her Republican colleague to step down on Tuesday.

A bipartisan group of lawmakers began the impeachment proceedings against Mr Ravnsborg the same day.

In an unusual move, Ms Noem released the footage of Mr Ravnsborg's questioning later on Tuesday.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on February 24, 2021, 07:48:27 PM
Quote from: T. D. on February 24, 2021, 02:56:13 PM
the victim's glasses were found in his car

WTF!!!  So this wasn't "THUMP...what was that?" on a dark night.  The man's face smashed through his windshield with such force that his glasses ended up in the car.  And he won't step down. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on February 25, 2021, 06:20:46 AM
Quote from: Daverz on February 24, 2021, 07:48:27 PM
WTF!!!  So this wasn't "THUMP...what was that?" on a dark night.  The man's face smashed through his windshield with such force that his glasses ended up in the car.  And he won't step down.


The legislature started impeachment proceedings, today, I think. In a level of intelligent cooperation that the Feds can only aspire to, it was a fully bipartisan effort. 🙂

😎
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 25, 2021, 12:03:57 PM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on February 25, 2021, 06:20:46 AM

The legislature started impeachment proceedings, today, I think. In a level of intelligent cooperation that the Feds can only aspire to, it was a fully bipartisan effort. 🙂

😎

Can't laugh, for crying.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on February 25, 2021, 01:05:43 PM
This interview with University of Chicago professor Robert Pape sheds light on the demographics of the Capitol insurrectionists. Turns out only a small percentage were affiliated with extremist groups. The great majority are gainfully employed with a surprising number being professionals, white collar workers, and business owners. Most resided in counties Biden won.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubNwct0nO4U
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on February 25, 2021, 01:46:41 PM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on February 25, 2021, 06:20:46 AM
it was a fully bipartisan effort. 🙂

Didn't think I would see that phrase anytime this year!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Rinaldo on February 25, 2021, 09:43:13 PM
The Golden calf arrives at CPAC. (https://twitter.com/MollyJongFast/status/1365141354960084994)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on February 26, 2021, 03:39:01 AM
Quote from: Rinaldo on February 25, 2021, 09:43:13 PM
The Golden calf arrives at CPAC. (https://twitter.com/MollyJongFast/status/1365141354960084994)
Oh, Lordie! 😬🙄
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on February 26, 2021, 11:37:07 AM
As you have seen I have been quite passive in this thread recently. I have managed to lose most of my interest into US politics. I still see what's happening, but I just don't care. For example the electricity problems in Texas: Yeah, that's what happens when corruption dictates how basic infrastructure is run. That's what happens when you don't have adequate regulation in place. Texas was warned 10 years ago. They did not listen. So, this is what happened. If Texas were smart they would stop voting for corrupt Republicans and started voting for the furthest left Democrats not brided by the energy industry, but of course they aren't that smart. They have been brainwashed. So, next time Texas has a winter storm this will happen again... and again. Should I care? Texans can decide themselves whether they want to be smart or stupid.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: ritter on February 26, 2021, 11:57:56 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on February 26, 2021, 11:37:07 AM
As you have seen I have been quite passive in this thread recently. I have managed to lose most of my interest into US politics. I still see what's happening, but I just don't care. For example the electricity problems in Texas: Yeah, that's what happens when corruption dictates how basic infrastructure is run. That's what happens when you don't have adequate regulation in place. Texas was warned 10 years ago. They did not listen. So, this is what happened. If Texas were smart they would stop voting for corrupt Republicans and started voting for the furthest left Democrats not brided by the energy industry, but of course they aren't that smart. They have been brainwashed. So, next time Texas has a winter storm this will happen again... and again. Should I care? Texans can decide themselves whether they want to be smart or stupid.
Your grasp of the minutiae of how America works, and your subsequent pontificating, is worthy of admiration.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on February 26, 2021, 01:10:56 PM
Quote from: geralmar on February 26, 2021, 10:47:02 AM
And wearing the American flag for boxer shorts.

(https://i.postimg.cc/zbYstkzv/img.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/zbYstkzv)


Seriously, what are these idiots thinking?



     Moses was a globalist.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mandryka on February 27, 2021, 01:51:23 AM
Can I ask a question which may appear very naive, but the more I think about it the less I'm clear.

Why did Trump lose the last election?

or maybe I should say, I don't know

Why did Biden win the last election?


Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on February 27, 2021, 02:31:17 AM
Quote from: Mandryka on February 27, 2021, 01:51:23 AM
Can I ask a question which may appear very naive, but the more I think about it the less I'm clear.

Why did Trump lose the last election?

or maybe I should say, I don't know

Why did Biden win the last election?

I'd mention three main reasons:

1) Trump's presidency overall was so bad the Democratic voters were active to make sure he doesn't get 4 more years.
2) The bad handling of Covid-19 pandemic revealed the incompetence of Trump. Outsider became insider, part of the swamp.
3) Joe Biden is not hated the same way Hillary Clinton is.

Althou Biden got 7 million more votes than Trump, the election was actually very close. Some 50,000 more votes for Trump in a few swing states Trump now lost would have change the outcome of the election. Trump getting re-elected in 2024 is a real danger and the scary thing is the Democrats don't have the means to address the danger because most of them are too corrupt. Just look how much they struggle to get $15 living wage implemented even when controlling everything: The house, the senate and presidency. The weakest political party ever...  ::)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mandryka on February 27, 2021, 03:16:53 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on February 27, 2021, 02:31:17 AM

2) The bad handling of Covid-19 pandemic revealed the incompetence of Trump. Outsider became insider, part of the swamp.


So he couldn't manage perception on that issue, and that contributed to his downfall. Somehow the health crisis was a dose of reality which even Trump couldn't obscure. If that's right it's interesting because it seems to show that reality is still a force in a democracy, Trump didn't find a way of protecting himself, despite his control of the media.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on February 27, 2021, 06:26:10 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on February 27, 2021, 02:31:17 AM
I'd mention three main reasons:

1) Trump's presidency overall was so bad the Democratic voters were active to make sure he doesn't get 4 more years.
2) The bad handling of Covid-19 pandemic revealed the incompetence of Trump. Outsider became insider, part of the swamp.
3) Joe Biden is not hated the same way Hillary Clinton is.
...

Yes, probably these are the main points.

I was told by quite a few Americans after the 2016 election that while they didn't thing highly of Trump they positively were not going to voted for Hillary

If Trump had crushed the Covid-19 pandemic he would have won the election, however there never was much chance of that.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on February 27, 2021, 08:03:18 AM
#2 is by far the strongest.  I don't actually think #1 is right.  Elections are won or lost based on the undecided more than the entrenched.  I didn't see the election as a win for the democratic party, but rather as a loss for the republican party. I would add a #4, when Trump won in 2016 it was with a promise that he would be a breath of fresh air in Washington.  He not only failed but increased the corruption and bipartisanship despite promising the opposite.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on February 27, 2021, 08:41:59 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on February 27, 2021, 06:26:10 AM
Yes, probably these are the main points.

I was told by quite a few Americans after the 2016 election that while they didn't think highly of Trump, they positively were not going to vote for Hillary

Hillary got three million more votes than Trump in 2016.

QuoteIf Trump had crushed the Covid-19 pandemic he would have won the election, however there never was much chance of that.

As a professional con man Trump operates on the principle / belief that people that people will buy whatever he says. In the case of Covid a sufficient nr of people did not buy his "like a miracle it'll go away".

Fauci clearly was a more dependable figure than Trump, to many people.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on February 27, 2021, 09:09:26 AM
Quote from: Herman on February 27, 2021, 08:41:59 AM
Hillary got three million more votes than Trump in 2016.

Unfortunately in wrong places. Tons of votes in California don't help if you need them in the rust belt and Hillary ignored the rust belt.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on February 27, 2021, 09:48:36 AM
Looking at clips from CPAC I'm surprised the amount of yelling speakers.

I mean, Don Jr. and his ghastly Frankenbride, you expect them to be unaware you don't have to raise your voice with a microphone. But Gaetz, Cruz and some other guy I don't know, they're all yelling.

The history of yelling politrcal speakers is not too great. One yells to instill fear, and at some point fear will turn against you.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on February 27, 2021, 09:49:19 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on February 27, 2021, 09:09:26 AM
Unfortunately in wrong places. Tons of votes in California don't help if you need them in the rust belt and Hillary ignored the rust belt.

I know. I'm just a little tired of the "nobody liked Hillary" thing.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 27, 2021, 10:06:16 AM
Quote from: Herman on February 27, 2021, 09:48:36 AM
Looking at clips from CPAC I'm surprised the amount of yelling speakers.

They're picking up right where the RNC left off.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on February 27, 2021, 10:09:22 AM
Quote from: Herman on February 27, 2021, 09:49:19 AM
I know. I'm just a little tired of the "nobody liked Hillary" thing.

Before Trump won I thought Hillary is very much loved! That's why her defeat was so surprising to me. I didn't know Democrats are also very corrupt and how some people really hate Hillary. Learning about these things explained a lot! Of course you are right saying it's silly to say EVERYONE hates Hillary. Hillary could have won if she had made a smart campaing, but of course she didn't, arrogant, out-of-touch and corrupt as she is.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on February 27, 2021, 11:48:16 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on February 27, 2021, 10:09:22 AM
Before Trump won I thought Hillary is very much loved! That's why her defeat was so surprising to me. I didn't know Democrats are also very corrupt and how some people really hate Hillary. Learning about these things explained a lot! Of course you are right saying it's silly to say EVERYONE hates Hillary. Hillary could have won if she had made a smart campaing, but of course she didn't, arrogant, out-of-touch and corrupt as she is.

Of course not everybody hates Hillary Clinton.  For a start it helps hating her if you're a hardcore Republican partisan and Democrat hater.  After that all it takes is a mild sensitivity to her smarmines (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/smarmy)s.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on February 27, 2021, 01:32:55 PM
Quote from: Herman on February 27, 2021, 09:48:36 AM
Looking at clips from CPAC I'm surprised the amount of yelling speakers.

I mean, Don Jr. and his ghastly Frankenbride, you expect them to be unaware you don't have to raise your voice with a microphone. But Gaetz, Cruz and some other guy I don't know, they're all yelling.

The history of yelling politrcal speakers is not too great. One yells to instill fear, and at some point fear will turn against you.

They're all yelling and not a single one of them believes what they're yelling. Anyone supporting Trump at this point is accepting his de facto platform for the Republican Party, which is the end of free elections, the end of the rule of law, and the end of democracy. They are trying to establish a kleptocratic oligarchy and dictatorship in which they maintain and expand their power. Treating them as anything but aspiring criminals against humanity is naive.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on February 27, 2021, 05:23:37 PM
well, the GOP has been a minority party for a couple of decades now.

voter supression has been a central plank for them much longer.

the open violence is new however.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on February 28, 2021, 03:42:33 AM
Quote from: Herman on February 27, 2021, 05:23:37 PM
well, the GOP has been a minority party for a couple of decades now.

voter supression has been a central plank for them much longer.

the open violence is new however.

They are losing the cultural war. They are losing the demographic change. Soon voter suppression/gerrymandering etc. just isn't enough to keep GOP in power. If you lose one war, you can start new ones: War on facts. Trump won that war. Facts are not a thing anymore. Now what you believe yourself is called fact. If you believe Biden stole the election then that's the fact for you. Now we also have War on democracy. Hence open violence. All this on top of everything else. The future of the US is very very dark. Tons of turmoil ahead before things can get better.  :-\
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on February 28, 2021, 04:24:07 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on February 28, 2021, 03:42:33 AM
They are losing the cultural war. They are losing the demographic change. Soon voter suppression/gerrymandering etc. just isn't enough to keep GOP in power. If you lose one war, you can start new ones: War on facts. Trump won that war. Facts are not a thing anymore. Now what you believe yourself is called fact. If you believe Biden stole the election then that's the fact for you. Now we also have War on democracy. Hence open violence. All this on top of everything else. The future of the US is very very dark. Tons of turmoil ahead before things can get better.  :-\

Biden has got to perform well in office -- in large part that means he has to be lucky.

I have predicted for decades that if democracy fails in the USA it will right-wing authoritarianism that replaces it, not Communism, socialism, or the "extreme left".  This will happen in 2024 if Biden fares poorly and Trump or a surrogate, say Ted Cruz, runs for the Republicans.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on February 28, 2021, 04:36:34 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on February 28, 2021, 04:24:07 AM
Biden has got to perform well in office -- in large part that means he has to be lucky.

I have predicted for decades that if democracy fails in the USA it will right-wing authoritarianism that replaces it, not Communism, socialism, or the "extreme left".  This will happen in 2024 if Biden fares poorly and Trump or a surrogate, say Ted Cruz, runs for the Republicans.

Good recent article on that theme:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/democrats-are-split-over-how-much-the-party-and-american-democracy-itself-are-in-danger/
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on February 28, 2021, 05:05:06 AM
Quote from: T. D. on February 28, 2021, 04:36:34 AM
Good recent article on that theme:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/democrats-are-split-over-how-much-the-party-and-american-democracy-itself-are-in-danger/

Thank you for that link;  I've only begun to read the article but I will finish it.

There is a real threat to democracy in the USA -- if it had been military leaders had been willing to support Trump instead of just rabble on January 6th there would have been a (successful) coup.  Thank goodness former Sec. of Defense spoke up for democracy and/or maybe it was Pelosi's  chat with the Joint Chief of Staff.  Sorry that was just too close for comfort.

On top of the US' four-way checks & balances, (Exec, Senate, HofR, Supreme Court), the Senate 60 vote requirement is a monstrosity that ensures deadlock -- not to mention Republican control despite being their being a minority.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on February 28, 2021, 08:32:44 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on February 28, 2021, 04:24:07 AM
Biden has got to perform well in office -- in large part that means he has to be lucky.

I have predicted for decades that if democracy fails in the USA it will right-wing authoritarianism that replaces it, not Communism, socialism, or the "extreme left".  This will happen in 2024 if Biden fares poorly and Trump or a surrogate, say Ted Cruz, runs for the Republicans.

He won't perform well* in office. Just like Obama, he will be a mixed bag. Some good stuff balancing out bad stuff. He is a status quo manager who bombs random brown people in Syria before giving Americans Covid relief - or healthcare - or living wage - or student loan debt cancellation. Americans keep suffering, but at least the military industry complex, Wall Street, Big Pharma and insurance companies are doing great! Business as usual. That's what status quo managers do. Performing well in office isn't even tried.

Social democracy is the best way to protect capitalism. Who opposes capitalism, if it works for people? Social democracy it the way to make capitalism work for people. Anyone who is scared for capitalism and communism/sosialism replacing it should be an advocate of social democracy. The US doesn't even have capitalism. It has crony capitalism aka socialism for the rich.

Communist revolutions is a danger when people are driven to total despair and they have nothing to lose. Right-wing authoritarianism is also a danger and in the US this is pretty evident. Republicans have an easy job of getting back in power unless Trump forms his own party splitting up the party.

* Well, he will do better than Trump, but that's a REALLY low bar.  :P
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on February 28, 2021, 10:44:12 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on February 28, 2021, 08:32:44 AM
...
Social democracy is the best way to protect capitalism. Who opposes capitalism, if it works for people? Social democracy it the way to make capitalism work for people. Anyone who is scared for capitalism and communism/sosialism replacing it should be an advocate of social democracy. The US doesn't even have capitalism. It has crony capitalism aka socialism for the rich.
...

I think you are profoundly correct that social democracy is the savior of capitalism but this far from understood by Americans including the politicians.

Measures such as universal healthcare, fully accessible and equal education for all, adequate minimum wage, etc., are necessary to make capitalism tolerable to ordinary working people -- they are NOT classic socialism.  Trump supporters, (apart from opportunists and lackeys), are overwhelmingly "ordinary working people", (albeit most of them White);  unfortunately Trump and Republican Party have convinced that them these services are "socialist".  So sad:  they are afflicted by the uniquely American myth of the rugged, self-reliant individual.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 01, 2021, 10:04:54 AM

     From CPAC we get some cool symbolism in the design of the stage.

     (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EvQCOWMXYAIRfhk?format=jpg&name=360x360)

     The symbol is called the Odal Rune, and it was used in place of the swastika on Waffen SS uniforms as seen above. Thanks goes to Morgan Freeman for pointing out this happy coincidence on Twitter.

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 01, 2021, 12:00:15 PM
A study from Cambridge University shows that conservatives and nationalists are more prone to "reduced strategic information processing..."

"Our brains hold clues for the ideologies we choose to live by, according to research, which has suggested that people who espouse extremist attitudes tend to perform poorly on complex mental tasks."

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/feb/22/people-with-extremist-views-less-able-to-do-complex-mental-tasks-research-suggests
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on March 01, 2021, 01:56:18 PM
Quote from: drogulus on March 01, 2021, 10:04:54 AM
     From CPAC we get some cool symbolism in the design of the stage.

     (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EvQCOWMXYAIRfhk?format=jpg&name=360x360)

     The symbol is called the Odal Rune, and it was used in place of the swastika on Waffen SS uniforms as seen above. Thanks goes to Morgan Freeman for pointing out this happy coincidence on Twitter.

   

Holy s**t! Good catch.
But I'm sure it's merely a coincidence... :laugh:
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BWV 1080 on March 01, 2021, 02:01:31 PM
Quote from: drogulus on March 01, 2021, 10:04:54 AM
     From CPAC we get some cool symbolism in the design of the stage.

     (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EvQCOWMXYAIRfhk?format=jpg&name=360x360)

     The symbol is called the Odal Rune, and it was used in place of the swastika on Waffen SS uniforms as seen above. Thanks goes to Morgan Freeman for pointing out this happy coincidence on Twitter.

The wiki article says the odal was 'Kinship, family and blood unity', which makes me think it was not a coincidence

   

Some Waffen SS uniforms.  It would have been the deaths head on a Totenkopf uniform, for example.  The Odal was on Nederland, the brigade of Dutch traitors raised in 1943
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runic_insignia_of_the_Schutzstaffel

Apologies, am too much of a WW2 geek to let that past
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 01, 2021, 03:28:14 PM
Quote from: BWV 1080 on March 01, 2021, 02:01:31 PM
Some Waffen SS uniforms.  It would have been the deaths head on a Totenkopf uniform, for example.  The Odal was on Nederland, the brigade of Dutch traitors raised in 1943
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runic_insignia_of_the_Schutzstaffel

Apologies, am too much of a WW2 geek to let that past

Thanks.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 01, 2021, 03:44:10 PM
     Also from Wiki:

The 7th SS Volunteer Mountain Division "Prinz Eugen" (7. SS-Freiwilligen Gebirgs-Division "Prinz Eugen"), initially named the SS-Volunteer Division Prinz Eugen (SS-Freiwilligen-Division "Prinz Eugen"), was a German mountain infantry division of the Waffen-SS during World War II. It served only in occupied Yugoslavia. Formed in 1941 from both Germans and Volksdeutsche (ethnic German) volunteers and conscripts from the Banat, Independent State of Croatia, Hungary and Romania, the division fought a bloody counter-insurgency campaign against communist-led Yugoslav Partisan resistance forces in the German-occupied territories of Serbia and Montenegro, as well as elsewhere in Yugoslavia.

     (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/69/7th_SS_Division_Logo.svg/195px-7th_SS_Division_Logo.svg.png)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on March 02, 2021, 02:50:41 AM
Heard on the news this morning (CNN) that nearly 400,000 Texans are still without safe drinking water.  :(
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BWV 1080 on March 02, 2021, 06:18:30 AM
Dont think the odal was an accident and it is not 'just one of many' runes used by the Nazis, looks like it has been adopted as the replacement for the swastika - these articles are about 5 years old:

https://forward.com/news/356753/neo-nazis-shed-the-swastika-in-new-effort-to-reach-mainstream/

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/10/us/alt-right-national-socialist-movement-white-supremacy.html


Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 02, 2021, 08:02:45 AM
Quote from: BWV 1080 on March 02, 2021, 06:18:30 AM
Dont think the odal was an accident and it is not 'just one of many' runes used by the Nazis, looks like it has been adopted as the replacement for the swastika - these articles are about 5 years old:

https://forward.com/news/356753/neo-nazis-shed-the-swastika-in-new-effort-to-reach-mainstream/

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/10/us/alt-right-national-socialist-movement-white-supremacy.html




     That's good stuff about "mainstream" symbols. I have to agree that swastikas are a bit much. It's harder to not know very much about what they signify.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BWV 1080 on March 02, 2021, 08:11:57 AM
Even more troubling was the afterparty entertainment at CPAC

https://www.youtube.com/v/HPXHRX8Q2hs
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 02, 2021, 09:16:45 AM
Quote from: BWV 1080 on March 02, 2021, 06:18:30 AM
Dont think the odal was an accident and it is not 'just one of many' runes used by the Nazis, looks like it has been adopted as the replacement for the swastika - these articles are about 5 years old:

https://forward.com/news/356753/neo-nazis-shed-the-swastika-in-new-effort-to-reach-mainstream/

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/10/us/alt-right-national-socialist-movement-white-supremacy.html




No coincidence, indeed.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on March 02, 2021, 09:32:58 PM
Damn you "Dr Seuss Enterprises" - you've got me agreeing with Fox hosts.

"On Beyond Zebra" was one of my favorite of his books. I'm trying to find what the offensive image is supposed to be but haven't found it yet.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on March 03, 2021, 04:43:42 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on March 02, 2021, 09:32:58 PM
Damn you "Dr Seuss Enterprises" - you've got me agreeing with Fox hosts.

"On Beyond Zebra" was one of my favorite of his books. I'm trying to find what the offensive image is supposed to be but haven't found it yet.

Let us know when you find it, okay?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on March 03, 2021, 07:02:49 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on March 02, 2021, 09:32:58 PM
Damn you "Dr Seuss Enterprises" - you've got me agreeing with Fox hosts.

"On Beyond Zebra" was one of my favorite of his books. I'm trying to find what the offensive image is supposed to be but haven't found it yet.
I was remembering those Warner Brothers cartoons I grew up on with characters literally getting bombed and having their faces blown apart. Not good.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BWV 1080 on March 03, 2021, 07:17:29 AM
Quote from: milk on March 03, 2021, 07:02:49 AM
I was remembering those Warner Brothers cartoons I grew up on with characters literally getting bombed and having their faces blown apart. Not good.

No, they were great!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on March 03, 2021, 01:27:26 PM
And we thought Trump was bad! Biden has taken to insulting entire species. Today he compared Neanderthals to Texas republicans. So unfair. Neanderthals demonstrated the ability to learn from the past.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 03, 2021, 02:09:37 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on March 03, 2021, 01:27:26 PM
And we thought Trump was bad! Biden has taken to insulting entire species. Today he compared Neanderthals to Texas republicans. So unfair. Neanderthals demonstrated the ability to learn from the past.

Surprisingly insensitive to our precursors, I thought.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on March 03, 2021, 02:37:23 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on March 03, 2021, 04:43:42 AM
Let us know when you find it, okay?

Done. It appears to be this one:

(https://i2.wp.com/nerdbot.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Screenshot-2021-03-02-090134.jpg?resize=1024%2C546&ssl=1)

(https://smartcdn.prod.postmedia.digital/nationalpost/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/On-Beyond-Zebra.jpg?quality=90&strip=all&w=400)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on March 03, 2021, 04:19:43 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on March 03, 2021, 02:37:23 PM
Done. It appears to be this one:

(https://i2.wp.com/nerdbot.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Screenshot-2021-03-02-090134.jpg?resize=1024%2C546&ssl=1)

(https://smartcdn.prod.postmedia.digital/nationalpost/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/On-Beyond-Zebra.jpg?quality=90&strip=all&w=400)

I guess that's offensive(?)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on March 03, 2021, 09:58:26 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on March 03, 2021, 04:19:43 PM
I guess that's offensive(?)
aren't there much worse ones?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Rinaldo on March 04, 2021, 12:53:58 AM
Finally a moment that converges all things GMG into a single glorious piece of art. Make quarter tones great again! (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQ-O72WMRKo)

https://www.youtube.com/v/AQ-O72WMRKo
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on March 04, 2021, 02:04:52 AM
I don't get it. A male quartet volunteered (digitally) to back up that fabulously awful singer at the CPAC, thus robbing her of her blissful awfulness?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 04, 2021, 02:21:17 AM
How many here still believe Biden and other corporate Dems REALLY wanted $15 living wage?

Kamala Harris is Biden's VP. Biden could tell Harris to fire the Parlamentarian and get a new one who says including the $15 liviving wage into the relief package is ok, or Harris could just ignore the Parlamentarian, because the Parlamentarian doesn't have real political power. However, the Dems don't want to do anything, because they don't really want living wage. They are corrupt and economically super right-wing. Trump delivered more Covid-19 relief to people than Dems are even planning to do at this point. Biden has done some good moves so far, especially in bringing the US back into the international tables, but otherwise this has been really weak. Bombing Syria before Covid relief checks? WTF? The Dems promised $2000 checks immediately. Now it's March, people don't have checks and it's now $1400. Dems also RUN on $15 living wage and now they seem to be doing all the tricks in the book to kill it.  The mid-term elections will be a blood-bath for the Dems.  :-\

George W. Bush was the last president to increase the minimum wage. Meanwhile the net worth of the richest people have more than doubled. Somehow I'm beginning to feel the poor people in the US actually do better when the Republicans are in power... ...however, Biden and other Dems can prove me wrong. I'm waiting. $15 living wage would be a good start.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 04, 2021, 05:30:04 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 04, 2021, 02:21:17 AM
How many here still believe Biden and other corporate Dems REALLY wanted $15 living wage?

I do.  Notwithstanding your largely irrelevant and partly absurd sequel, the minimum wage issue does not die on this hill.  It isn't a question of "this bill, or never."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on March 04, 2021, 05:41:53 AM
Quote from: milk on March 03, 2021, 09:58:26 PM
aren't there much worse ones?

Yes there are which I won't post here but can be found on the NYTimes article.  I don't agree that this is "cancel culture" because regardless of reason publishers do NOT have an obligation to the public to keep something in print in perpetuity.  If libraries were pulling these books or governments were banning that would be a completely different story.

Now I do feel that something is lost when these books go out of print due to their significance as first works of such an influential writer.  But eventually I'm sure they will end up in the public domain.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on March 04, 2021, 05:43:32 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 04, 2021, 05:30:04 AM
I do.  Notwithstanding your largely irrelevant and partly absurd sequel, the minimum wage issue does not die on this hill.  It isn't a question of "this bill, or never."

I do too.  But I never thought it should have been lumped in with covid relief since it is a long term economic plan and not immediate stimulus.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 04, 2021, 06:03:57 AM
Quote from: DavidW on March 04, 2021, 05:43:32 AM
I do too.  But I never thought it should have been lumped in with covid relief since it is a long term economic plan and not immediate stimulus.

Exactly.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on March 04, 2021, 06:52:25 AM
Quote from: DavidW on March 04, 2021, 05:41:53 AM
Yes there are which I won't post here but can be found on the NYTimes article.  I don't agree that this is "cancel culture" because regardless of reason publishers do NOT have an obligation to the public to keep something in print in perpetuity.  If libraries were pulling these books or governments were banning that would be a completely different story.

Now I do feel that something is lost when these books go out of print due to their significance as first works of such an influential writer.  But eventually I'm sure they will end up in the public domain.
I agree with you. Cancel Culture is a real thing and this ain't it as far as I can see. However, I do wonder about whether more is to come. I also hope they're not misrepresenting who Geisel was as a person. As Far as I understand it, he was a liberal democrat who evolved his views during his life.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 04, 2021, 08:43:05 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 04, 2021, 05:30:04 AM
I do.

Your wide-eyedness would be cute if it wasn't depressing Karl.

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 04, 2021, 05:30:04 AM...., the minimum wage issue does not die on this hill.  It isn't a question of "this bill, or never."

I wonder when we get to the hill where it IS "this bill." The left is joking the US gets $15 living wage when inflation has made it worth $6. The Dems are controlling the house, senate and white house. About 80 % of Americans are in favour of minimum wage increase. Why is this so hard then? It's hard, because the political will is weak and it's weak because of corruption. That's why tax cuts for the rich are so easy, while anything that would help the poor and regular people is so hard.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on March 05, 2021, 09:31:01 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/05/gop-groups-quiet-as-donor-accused-of-running-biggest-tax-fraud-scheme-ever.html

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on March 05, 2021, 12:40:09 PM
This is an amazing exchange:

REPORTER: Americans are saying immigrant surges are happening under President Biden's watch

PSAKI: Who are the Americans?

REPORTER: The former president

PSAKI: Former President Trump?

REPORTER: Yes

PSAKI: We don't take our advice or counsel from former President Trump

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1367912011787567107

The reporter is from CBS, not some right wing blog.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BWV 1080 on March 05, 2021, 01:31:46 PM
Quote from: T. D. on March 05, 2021, 09:31:01 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/05/gop-groups-quiet-as-donor-accused-of-running-biggest-tax-fraud-scheme-ever.html

He may be a billionaire, but hardly a big donor - according to the article made a few one-comma donations back in 2017
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 06, 2021, 04:07:44 AM
Now we know the eight "closet Republicans" in the senate who are against $15 living wage. The left may lose the votes, but forcing votes is a way to expose these bullshitters who say one thing and do another thing. Voters know now who to vote OUT.

Also, if you still think Kamala Harris and Joe Biden are really for $15 living wage you are a simpleton. They work for the Chamber of commerce. Biden is a status quo manager for the oligarchs. Chamber of commerce doesn't want $15 living wage. 4/5 of Democratic voters and 2/3 of all Americans support $15 living wage. However, Biden is not the president of the Dems or all Americans. He is the president of the oligarchs. That's the reason why bombing Syria was so easy for him while getting $15 living wage passed seems impossible.

The progressives in Congress need to learn how to use all the leverage they have or otherwise they will never get anything done. They need to understand corporate Dems are just as much their enemies as are the Republicans. What do you do with your enemies? You fight and use all the power you have against them. That's how politics is played.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on March 06, 2021, 05:01:10 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 06, 2021, 04:07:44 AM
Now we know the eight "closet Republicans" in the senate who are against $15 living wage. The left may lose the votes, but forcing votes is a way to expose these bullshitters who say one thing and do another thing. Voters know now who to vote OUT.

Also, if you still think Kamala Harris and Joe Biden are really for $15 living wage you are a simpleton. They work for the Chamber of commerce. Biden is a status quo manager for the oligarchs. Chamber of commerce doesn't want $15 living wage. 4/5 of Democratic voters and 2/3 of all Americans support $15 living wage. However, Biden is not the president of the Dems or all Americans. He is the president of the oligarchs. That's the reason why bombing Syria was so easy for him while getting $15 living wage passed seems impossible.

The progressives in Congress need to learn how to use all the leverage they have or otherwise they will never get anything done. They need to understand corporate Dems are just as much their enemies as are the Republicans. What do you do with your enemies? You fight and use all the power you have against them. That's how politics is played.

Were the USA a thorough democracy there would plenty of progressives in Congress including in the Senate.

Perhaps the greatest travesty is the control states have of the Federal electoral process. Partisan state control over district definition ensures gerrymandering in favor of Republicans;  same for voter registration and location of polls and the like.  In real federal democracies, federal districts, registration, and election-day practices are control by non-partisan, federal commissions.

But then the "founding fathers" didn't believe in fundamental democracy but, in fact, in oligarchy, so the Constitution was written the way it was, so ...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on March 06, 2021, 05:28:52 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 06, 2021, 04:07:44 AM
Now we know the eight "closet Republicans" in the senate who are against $15 living wage. The left may lose the votes, but forcing votes is a way to expose these bullshitters who say one thing and do another thing. Voters know now who to vote OUT.

Your view is overly simplistic.  Most of them are representing states with a much lower cost of living and there would be far more job losses than raising people out of poverty if the minimum wage was overly increased.  You must understand that what is considered a living wave is variable from state to state.

Now I support increasing minimum wage.  But let's not demonize these democrats.  Instead of labeling them as corporate shills you have to least try to uncover the underlying motivation.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 06, 2021, 05:57:37 AM
Quote from: DavidW on March 06, 2021, 05:28:52 AM
Your view is overly simplistic.  Most of them are representing states with a much lower cost of living and there would be far more job losses than raising people out of poverty if the minimum wage was overly increased.  You must understand that what is considered a living wave is variable from state to state.

Now I support increasing minimum wage.  But let's not demonize these democrats.  Instead of labeling them as corporate shills you have to least try to uncover the underlying motivation.

Job loss due to higher wages is largely a (right-wing) myth. Sure, there would be job losses, but on the other hand people would not have to have 2 or even 3 jobs to survive so that would help. Jobs that can only exist because of wage slavery aren't real jobs. Real jobs pay living wage. Mom-and-pop stores can be subscidized if needed.

Yes, living wage varies from place to place and it doesn't have to be $15 everywhere, but $7.25 is not living wage anywhere. Also, Dems campaigned on $15. If Biden thinks it should be $12 in Alabama and $18 in California why doesn't he say so?

Underlying motivation? Is it unclear to you? Hint: Starts with M and ends with y. Five letters.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on March 06, 2021, 08:06:02 AM
Quote from: DavidW on March 06, 2021, 05:28:52 AM
Your view is overly simplistic.  Most of them are representing states with a much lower cost of living and there would be far more job losses than raising people out of poverty if the minimum wage was overly increased.  You must understand that what is considered a living wave is variable from state to state.

Now I support increasing minimum wage.  But let's not demonize these democrats.  Instead of labeling them as corporate shills you have to least try to uncover the underlying motivation.

The main reason they voted against it is that it doesn't qualify as something that can be included in a budget resolution.  It would be challenged in court and thrown out.
It needs to be done as part of a regular bill. Everyone in the chamber knew or should have known that.  Including Bernie.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 06, 2021, 08:47:49 AM
Quote from: JBS on March 06, 2021, 08:06:02 AM
The main reason they voted against it is that it doesn't qualify as something that can be included in a budget resolution.  It would be challenged in court and thrown out.
It needs to be done as part of a regular bill. Everyone in the chamber knew or should have known that.  Including Bernie.

     They could overrule the Senate parliamentarian if they wanted to. It's happened before. The Senate can change its rules on what qualifies in the reconciliation process if they can get a majority vote to do so. They don't need a reconciliation or a filibuster supermajority (which used to require 67 votes before they changed it).

     Anti-majority rules are more likely to prevent bipartisanship than promote it, if such a thing matters. Majorities used to pass legislation of all kinds and filibusters were mostly used for traditional white supremacy Lost Cause stuff. Repubs can avoid the bipartisan taint by hiding behind the filibuster. Without it they'd have to bargain for what they want, and they would also be exposed to the horror of wanting things for their constituents.

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 06, 2021, 09:15:20 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 06, 2021, 04:07:44 AM
Also, if you still think Kamala Harris and Joe Biden are really for $15 living wage you are a simpleton.
Your opinion is noted.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 06, 2021, 10:22:40 AM
Quote from: JBS on March 06, 2021, 08:06:02 AM
It needs to be done as part of a regular bill. Everyone in the chamber knew or should have known that.  Including Bernie.

Yeah, but Republicans will filibuster it to dead. Good luck having less than 40 Republican senators elected.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on March 10, 2021, 08:24:05 AM
There aren't enough emojis for this one...  :laugh: ...Grifter's gonna grift.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/10/gop-praises-trump-after-he-urges-republican-donors-to-send-money-directly-to-him.html

...Trump's PAC has reportedly raised tens of millions of dollars since it was formed after the Nov. 3 election. That money can be used for "just about anything" Trump wants, experts say — including providing benefits for himself and his family.

"It's entirely possible Trump could use Save America both to maintain control and influence over the Republican Party and also to benefit himself and his family members personally," Brendan Fischer, Federal Reform Program director at the Campaign Legal Center, told CNBC.

At the same time Trump is pushing his own PAC, he is demanding that the GOP stop using his name and likeness in its own fundraising efforts.
...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on March 10, 2021, 10:05:53 AM
Quote from: T. D. on March 10, 2021, 08:24:05 AM
There aren't enough emojis for this one...  :laugh: ...Grifter's gonna grift.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/10/gop-praises-trump-after-he-urges-republican-donors-to-send-money-directly-to-him.html

...Trump's PAC has reportedly raised tens of millions of dollars since it was formed after the Nov. 3 election. That money can be used for "just about anything" Trump wants, experts say — including providing benefits for himself and his family.

"It's entirely possible Trump could use Save America both to maintain control and influence over the Republican Party and also to benefit himself and his family members personally," Brendan Fischer, Federal Reform Program director at the Campaign Legal Center, told CNBC.

At the same time Trump is pushing his own PAC, he is demanding that the GOP stop using his name and likeness in its own fundraising efforts.
...

The whole Trump phenomenon is a tale of gullibility.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 10, 2021, 12:42:16 PM
Quote from: Fëanor on March 10, 2021, 10:05:53 AM
The whole Trump phenomenon is a tale of gullibility.

It tells a lot about the US when the king of conmen became the president.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on March 10, 2021, 01:15:09 PM
Your constant sweeping anti-americanisms go well beyond criticism and into insulting and ignorant prejudice or bigotry.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on March 10, 2021, 03:13:00 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on March 10, 2021, 01:15:09 PM
Your constant sweeping anti-americanisms go well beyond criticism and into insulting and ignorant prejudice or bigotry.

I'm American, rarely agree with 71db on matters political, but have no problem with that last one...if the shoe fits, etc.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on March 10, 2021, 07:56:12 PM
I have not participated in this thread for awhile because it was just too much.

I had an interesting discussion with my brother who is a real Trumpster.

From talking with him he sounded really demoralized and fatalistic.  He realizes that Trump messed up the country but can not bring himself to acknowledge it.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on March 10, 2021, 08:17:32 PM
Quote from: arpeggio on March 10, 2021, 07:56:12 PM
I have not participated in this thread for awhile because it was just too much.

I had an interesting discussion with my brother who is a real Trumpster.

From talking with him he sounded really demoralized and fatalistic.  He realizes that Trump messed up the country but can not bring himself to acknowledge it.

Did he / does he believe Trump actually won the election?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 11, 2021, 01:23:22 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on March 10, 2021, 01:15:09 PM
Your constant sweeping anti-americanisms go well beyond criticism and into insulting and ignorant prejudice or bigotry.

I am far from anti-American. I am pointing out the problems because I want the country to become better and Americans to have better life.
A lot of Americans are stupid and ignorant, but that's not because they were born that way. It's because of the oligarchy making main stream media a status quo aparatus for the top 1 % so that most people never get to learn about the truth about things. Yes, people become ignorant and stupid if they are constantly told lies as facts. Unfortunately ignorance has it's consequences. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 11, 2021, 01:28:31 AM
Quote from: arpeggio on March 10, 2021, 07:56:12 PM
I have not participated in this thread for awhile because it was just too much.

I had an interesting discussion with my brother who is a real Trumpster.

From talking with him he sounded really demoralized and fatalistic.  He realizes that Trump messed up the country but can not bring himself to acknowledge it.

The bolded part alone is a major step in the right direction. Of course it will take time for him to get over this. Be supportive and undertanding.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on March 11, 2021, 01:29:29 AM
Quote from: arpeggio on March 10, 2021, 07:56:12 PM
I have not participated in this thread for awhile because it was just too much.

I had an interesting discussion with my brother who is a real Trumpster.

From talking with him he sounded really demoralized and fatalistic.  He realizes that Trump messed up the country but can not bring himself to acknowledge it.
My sister lives in a total alternate reality where Trump indeed won and Biden is a socialist. She won't even talk to our parents (or me) anymore because they won't go along with it. She won't put politics aside for family or anything else. I guess she believes she's living through something like 1930s Nazi Germany. She got into the whole thing by way of anti-vaccination.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 11, 2021, 01:33:51 AM
Quote from: milk on March 11, 2021, 01:29:29 AM
My sister lives in a total alternate reality where Trump indeed won and Biden is a socialist. She won't even talk to our parents (or me) anymore because they won't go along with it. She won't put politics aside for family or anything else. I guess she believes she's living through something like 1930s Nazi Germany. She got into the whole thing by way of anti-vaccination.

I'm sorry to hear about your sister. Must be hard for your family and you to deal with the situation. Almost anyone can be brainwashed to anything these days...  :-X
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on March 11, 2021, 03:58:44 AM
Quote from: milk on March 11, 2021, 01:29:29 AM
My sister lives in a total alternate reality where Trump indeed won and Biden is a socialist. She won't even talk to our parents (or me) anymore because they won't go along with it. She won't put politics aside for family or anything else. I guess she believes she's living through something like 1930s Nazi Germany. She got into the whole thing by way of anti-vaccination.

Germans were sucked in by the BIG LIE that their country lost only because their country was "stabbed in the back" by Communists, socialists, and Jews.  Trumpites believe their conman's BIG LIE that he really won the election that was stolen from him by Democrats.

... The parallel is chilling.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 11, 2021, 03:14:20 PM
Take It From a Swede, Forget the 'Fight for $15' (https://thebulwark.com/take-it-from-a-swede-forget-the-fight-for-15/)

Judging by comments from progressive groups and the White House, the "fight for $15" isn't over, even though the $15-minimum wage provision originally included in the recent $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief bill was stripped out before passage due to the arcana of the budget process. But take it from those of us who live in Northern Europe's social democracies: It's not a good idea.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 11, 2021, 03:49:52 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 11, 2021, 03:14:20 PM
Take It From a Swede, Forget the 'Fight for $15' (https://thebulwark.com/take-it-from-a-swede-forget-the-fight-for-15/)

Judging by comments from progressive groups and the White House, the "fight for $15" isn't over, even though the $15-minimum wage provision originally included in the recent $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief bill was stripped out before passage due to the arcana of the budget process. But take it from those of us who live in Northern Europe's social democracies: It's not a good idea.

If America were to follow Europe's example, the unemployment rate among immigrants could increase by several times its current level. The continued intake of immigrants could exacerbate already inflamed racial tensions. It's difficult to imagine better circumstances for Trumpism to be resurrected, especially considering the clear relationship between youth unemployment and crime.

     No, it won't happen like that, or it would have happened in high minimum wage states now. Of course, if the minimum wage stays where it is, immigrants can always go to higher wage states where jobs are more plentiful. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/tongue.gif) And many open businesses, too, which is easier in the U.S.

     The notion that higher pay is bad for business is conservative defeatism. Your workers are my customers and my workers are your customers. Raising the bottom rate creates new jobs from higher demand while it loses others. It's a positive sum trade. Otherwise the whole country would be racing to the bottom and Mississippi would be the Land of Opportunity.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 11, 2021, 04:28:11 PM
Not ashamed to admit that I enjoyed hearing President Biden's address.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 11, 2021, 05:28:53 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 11, 2021, 03:14:20 PM
Take It From a Swede, Forget the 'Fight for $15' (https://thebulwark.com/take-it-from-a-swede-forget-the-fight-for-15/)

Judging by comments from progressive groups and the White House, the "fight for $15" isn't over, even though the $15-minimum wage provision originally included in the recent $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief bill was stripped out before passage due to the arcana of the budget process. But take it from those of us who live in Northern Europe's social democracies: It's not a good idea.

Yet another oligarch-friendly story. Sweden has strong unions and wellfare.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on March 11, 2021, 09:52:49 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 11, 2021, 03:14:20 PM
Take It From a Swede, Forget the 'Fight for $15' (https://thebulwark.com/take-it-from-a-swede-forget-the-fight-for-15/)

Judging by comments from progressive groups and the White House, the "fight for $15" isn't over, even though the $15-minimum wage provision originally included in the recent $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief bill was stripped out before passage due to the arcana of the budget process. But take it from those of us who live in Northern Europe's social democracies: It's not a good idea.

The youth unemployment rate given for Sweden is quite dubious, since for example students, starting from 15 years, expecting to begin in a job in three months, all this parallel to their studies, are ranked as unemployed.

Btw the author himself is 29 years old.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: The new erato on March 12, 2021, 12:49:44 AM
A minimum wage ought to be unnecessary in a well organized, transparent and democratic society. That this discussion exists says a lot about the USA.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 12, 2021, 03:10:03 AM
Quote from: The new erato on March 12, 2021, 12:49:44 AM
A minimum wage ought to be unneccesary in a well organized, transparent and democratic society. That this discussion exists says a lot about the USA.

This is true. We don't have minimum wage laws here in Nordic countries. It's assumed people who work full time should be payed decently. However, since the US is too oligarchic and corrupt politically to become a well organized, transparent and democratic society in the near future, $15 living wage is an important "temporary" solution to avoid wage slavery.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on March 12, 2021, 04:57:08 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 12, 2021, 03:10:03 AM
This is true. We don't have minimum wage laws here in Nordic countries. It's assumed people who work full time should be payed decently. However, since the US is too oligarchic and corrupt politically to become a well organized, transparent and democratic society in the near future, $15 living wage is an important "temporary" solution to avoid wage slavery.

In addition to wage slavery we also have rent slavery and debt slavery.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: André on March 12, 2021, 05:10:28 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 12, 2021, 03:10:03 AM
This is true. We don't have minimum wage laws here in Nordic countries. It's assumed people who work full time should be payed decently. However, since the US is too oligarchic and corrupt politically to become a well organized, transparent and democratic society in the near future, $15 living wage is an important "temporary" solution to avoid wage slavery.

Indeed, Nordic countries have no minimum wage laws - just like Somalia, Egypt, Myanmar... I don't know what you're trying to prove. Countries that have minimum wage laws - like Germany, the Netherlands, France, UK and the rest of Europe, Australia, New Zealand etc are oligarchic, corrupt and practice wage slavery ??  ::)


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_minimum_wage (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_minimum_wage)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on March 12, 2021, 05:59:37 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on March 12, 2021, 04:57:08 AM
In addition to wage slavery we also have rent slavery and debt slavery.

Credit card debt is the new peonage.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on March 12, 2021, 06:02:25 AM
Quote from: drogulus on March 11, 2021, 03:49:52 PM
     The notion that higher pay is bad for business is conservative defeatism. Your workers are my customers and my workers are your customers. Raising the bottom rate creates new jobs from higher demand while it loses others. It's a positive sum trade. Otherwise the whole country would be racing to the bottom and Mississippi would be the Land of Opportunity.

Macroeconomics is not intuitive and one doesn't understand its precepts without a certain amount of education on the subject.  (It's a little easier the quantum physics I suppose.)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 12, 2021, 08:39:24 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on March 12, 2021, 04:57:08 AM
In addition to wage slavery we also have rent slavery and debt slavery.

Well, those even apply to the Nordic countries I am affraid...  :-\

Quote from: André on March 12, 2021, 05:10:28 AM
Indeed, Nordic countries have no minimum wage laws - just like Somalia, Egypt, Myanmar... I don't know what you're trying to prove. Countries that have minimum wage laws - like Germany, the Netherlands, France, UK and the rest of Europe, Australia, New Zealand etc are oligarchic, corrupt and practice wage slavery ??  ::)


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_minimum_wage (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_minimum_wage)

I am not trying to prove anything. I'm just saying the Nordic countries don't need minimum wage laws because people are payed more or less enough anyway. The existence of minimum wage laws isn't be all end all. The end goal is to have people payed enough to get by. How that is achieved is quite irrelevant.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on March 12, 2021, 05:05:07 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on March 12, 2021, 04:57:08 AM
In addition to wage slavery we also have rent slavery and debt slavery.
I'm not sure about rent slavery?...
But for debt slavery, I wonder if it were possible to prevent students from getting loans for college majors that won't get people a job, if that would help.

Since from high school you are always bombarded with the message that you must go to college, so people take out massive loans to get into huge debt and choose a career path that they would prefer, but there's no jobs (or only low-paying ones). And only provide Pell Grant and loans to students majoring in stuff like STEM, health care, etc.

College is for getting a well-paying career, not for having fun learning stuff. Only the rich get that luxury. But so many people don't see the practical reality of that. And widespread debt slavery is the result.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on March 12, 2021, 05:24:10 PM
Quote from: greg on March 12, 2021, 05:05:07 PM


College is for getting a well-paying career, not for having fun learning stuff.

False.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on March 12, 2021, 05:31:35 PM
https://sports.yahoo.com/oklahoma-high-school-basketball-norman-announcers-expletives-racial-slurs-broadcast-kneel-national-anthem-protest-193448980.html

An announcer calling an Oklahoma girls high school basketball game on Thursday night hurled racial slurs and expletives directed at a team when players kneeled during the national anthem.

The Norman girls basketball team took a knee in protest — something that has become commonplace in sports across all levels — ahead of their quarterfinals matchup with Midwest City on Thursday night.

The announcer was calling the game for an online broadcast on the NFHS Network. When he started seeing the protest, the announcer took offense and started slamming the team — though appeared to not know that his microphone was still on.

They're kneeling?" The announcer said. "F***ing n******. I hope Norman gets their ass kicked ... F*** them. I hope they lose.

"They're going to kneel like that? Hell no."

The announcer, Matt Rowan, was hired by the Oklahoma Secondary Schools Activities Association. He could be heard using the racial slur twice during the anthem before the broadcast returned.

Announcer blames racism, in part, on blood sugar

Rowan put out a statement on Friday afternoon apologizing, though actually tried to blame his comments in part on spiking blood sugar and his Type 1 Diabetes.

"I made inappropriate and racist comments believing the microphone was off, however let me state immediately that is no excuse such comments should have never been uttered," Rowan said in a statement, in part. "I am a family man. I am married, have two children and at one time was a youth pastor. I continue to be a member of the Baptist church. I have not only embarrassed and disappointed my family and friends.

"I will state that I suffer Type 1 Diabetes and during the game my sugar was spiking. While not excusing my remarks it is not unusual when my sugar spikes that I become disoriented and often say things that are not appropriate as well as hurtful. I do not believe that I would have made such horrible statements absent my sugar spiking."


Apologies to Yahoo for excessive quoting. This s**t was just too funny.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on March 12, 2021, 07:31:31 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on March 12, 2021, 05:24:10 PM
False.
False only if you're rich and have 50k+ to blow.
Otherwise, you can teach yourself many subjects online for free, without classes. Only reason I got my degree was because employers demanded it.
I could have learned the subject online, just as I have learned the most recent subject I've learned, online.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on March 12, 2021, 07:37:50 PM
Quote from: greg on March 12, 2021, 05:05:07 PM
I'm not sure about rent slavery?...
But for debt slavery, I wonder if it were possible to prevent students from getting loans for college majors that won't get people a job, if that would help.

Since from high school you are always bombarded with the message that you must go to college, so people take out massive loans to get into huge debt and choose a career path that they would prefer, but there's no jobs (or only low-paying ones). And only provide Pell Grant and loans to students majoring in stuff like STEM, health care, etc.

College is for getting a well-paying career, not for having fun learning stuff. Only the rich get that luxury. But so many people don't see the practical reality of that. And widespread debt slavery is the result.

The financial crisis of 08-09 put hundreds of thousands of homes into foreclosure and up for auction. Speculators (like Steve Mnuchin) bought them up, benefiting from government programs in taking them over and then renting them out, sometimes to the very people who had lost their shirts on the ballooning mortgages. Historically, and more obviously, redlining of real estate and denying mortgages to minorities forced many to live in prescribed inner city neighborhoods where rents were perennially artificially high because the slum lords had a clientele with systemically limited options.   
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on March 12, 2021, 08:03:38 PM
If not paywalled (I'm a subscriber), the following are interesting reads:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2021-03-09/racial-inequality-broken-property-tax-system-blocks-black-wealth-building

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2021-03-10/america-s-tax-code-leaves-black-people-behind-dorothy-brown
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 13, 2021, 06:38:14 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on March 12, 2021, 05:24:10 PM
False.

Indeed.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on March 13, 2021, 06:57:42 AM
Quote from: greg on March 12, 2021, 05:05:07 PM
College is for getting a well-paying career, not for having fun learning stuff.

So anyone that enjoyed their time in college you would assume are just lying to themselves??  Maybe get out of your head for a change and think about other perspectives.

It is true that it is becoming more and more a necessity to have a college degree to have any sense of upward mobility, and that is chaining a whole generation to loan debt that is mostly too high (I have former students that pay $70k per year for college).  But that doesn't mean that college is not enlightening, educational, transformative and downright fun.  It can be all of those things.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 13, 2021, 08:28:10 AM
Quote from: DavidW on March 13, 2021, 06:57:42 AM
So anyone that enjoyed their time in college you would assume are just lying to themselves??  Maybe get out of your head for a change and think about other perspectives.

It is true that it is becoming more and more a necessity to have a college degree to have any sense of upward mobility, and that is chaining a whole generation to loan debt that is mostly too high (I have former students that pay $70k per year for college).  But that doesn't mean that college is not enlightening, educational, transformative and downright fun.  It can be all of those things.

It certainly was for me.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 13, 2021, 08:36:42 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 13, 2021, 08:28:10 AM
It certainly was for me.

As I posted minutes before:

No great surprise, with the warming weather, I've now listened to this disc three times in two days:

Stravinsky
L
e sacre du printemps (1947 version)
L'oiseau de feu (1919 version)
Jeu de cartes
LSO
Abbado

When I was in the music program at the College of Wooster, hearing the Rite for the first time (I hadn't yet seen Fantasia, for instance) changed my musical life forever and made permanent imprint on my compositional sensibility. For no particular reason, I return to it relatively seldom, but it is evergreen for me. A great, Protean piece for which my ardor never cools.
Before I was graduated from "Woo," I heard the Clevelanders play it live in Severance Hall I still remember climbing up to the "nosebleed seats." What a great night that was!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on March 13, 2021, 12:42:24 PM
Quote from: DavidW on March 13, 2021, 06:57:42 AM
So anyone that enjoyed their time in college you would assume are just lying to themselves??  Maybe get out of your head for a change and think about other perspectives.
No, I don't mean that it can't be that also. Just that that is a secondary thing. If people also have fun with it, then that's great.


Quote from: DavidW on March 13, 2021, 06:57:42 AM
It is true that it is becoming more and more a necessity to have a college degree to have any sense of upward mobility, and that is chaining a whole generation to loan debt that is mostly too high (I have former students that pay $70k per year for college).
Yeah. You can't afford to be idealistic when you are young, you'll either starve or become a lifelong wage slave. Only rich people can afford to do that. Poor and lower middle class people have to think practically, and they make up the majority of college students (since they are a majority of the population). So that defines what the primary purpose that college is for (not what it should be for). Fun is just a bonus.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on March 13, 2021, 01:07:26 PM
It surprises me that you say you have a degree. Because I think of my university education as invaluable in teaching me how to use a research library and evaluate data and sources in a highly guided and focused way rather than the haphazard way I'd previously been doing as a constantly learning self-educator. And you seem to somehow think that a bunch of Youtube bobbleheads are all one needs for information and dismiss serious journalism or scholarly research and go so far as saying we should give "equal time" to the current equivalent of flat-earthers..
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on March 13, 2021, 03:44:04 PM
Quote from: greg on March 12, 2021, 05:05:07 PM
I'm not sure about rent slavery?...
But for debt slavery, I wonder if it were possible to prevent students from getting loans for college majors that won't get people a job, if that would help.

Since from high school you are always bombarded with the message that you must go to college, so people take out massive loans to get into huge debt and choose a career path that they would prefer, but there's no jobs (or only low-paying ones). And only provide Pell Grant and loans to students majoring in stuff like STEM, health care, etc.

College is for getting a well-paying career, not for having fun learning stuff. Only the rich get that luxury. But so many people don't see the practical reality of that. And widespread debt slavery is the result.
Education is different than training. I see a dark future without education. But education can become decadent and irrelevant too as a society drifts. That's not to devalue how important training is as well.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on March 14, 2021, 05:08:48 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on March 13, 2021, 01:07:26 PM
It surprises me that you say you have a degree. Because I think of my university education as invaluable in teaching me how to use a research library and evaluate data and sources in a highly guided and focused way rather than the haphazard way I'd previously been doing as a constantly learning self-educator. And you seem to somehow think that a bunch of Youtube bobbleheads are all one needs for information and dismiss serious journalism or scholarly research and go so far as saying we should give "equal time" to the current equivalent of flat-earthers..

This has been obvious for a long time.

The self-congratulatory tone is, of course, the effect of being locked up in a self-affirming info-bubble.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: The new erato on March 14, 2021, 08:13:04 AM
Higher education is for self improvement, growing up and understanding. With that, usually a career. If you go for it the other way round you will never grow up. QED in this thread it seems.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on March 14, 2021, 10:54:02 AM
Quote from: The new erato on March 14, 2021, 08:13:04 AM
Higher education is for self improvement, growing up and understanding. With that, usually a career. If you go for it the other way round you will never grow up. QED in this thread it seems.

I would never knock the value of higher education.  I would attribute my own to giving me a basic understand of macroeconomics, (for example), a subject that isn't especially intuitive.  On the other hand my knowledge of history and political science is mostly self-learned.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on March 14, 2021, 07:06:03 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on March 13, 2021, 01:07:26 PM
And you seem to somehow think that a bunch of Youtube bobbleheads are all one needs for information
It's irrelevant if they are "Youtube bobbleheads" or not. You don't have to have qualifications/degrees to have knowledge, although many of them also have that. I only care about the facts.

Though idk if you are talking about politics only, or broadly. Most of my learning about music production (only bought one small course in addition) is from youtube, like 90% of it. And I'm hearing results and feeling like I know what I'm doing a lot more now (even if I'm not an expert yet). So for that, it was pretty much all I needed for information. You can take classes for the same thing I learned, but it's not necessary.

There's no magical quality that classroom learning has that online information doesn't have (every field is a bit different, though). Being very highly self-critical and having the access to information was able to get my guitar skills and composition skills to where I could write and play anything I wanted (never took guitar/music composition lessons, either).

Quote from: SimonNZ on March 13, 2021, 01:07:26 PM
dismiss serious journalism or scholarly research
A lot of things that might be "serious journalism" are not to be taken seriously at all.


Quote from: SimonNZ on March 13, 2021, 01:07:26 PM
scholarly research
? I have no problem with scholarly research...

Quote from: SimonNZ on March 13, 2021, 01:07:26 PM
go so far as saying we should give "equal time" to the current equivalent of flat-earthers..
?



Quote from: Herman on March 14, 2021, 05:08:48 AM
The self-congratulatory tone is, of course, the effect of being locked up in a self-affirming info-bubble.
The self-congratulatory would mean narcissism, but when I finished college I didn't even go to graduation, and I think a narcissist would want to be the spotlight of attention for their achievements.

You would think, actually most people that did well enough (GPA was ~3.7) while having a job on the side, would want to brag about it, after all their struggles. But I never felt that way.

The only thing I felt was relief at it ending, and I'd rather watch a building burn or something as a celebration than have thousands of people clap for me. Also I didn't feel good at the way the job market had changed, which included IT/programming. The employers only cared about your credentials, because they needed a way to quickly filter through the massive amount of job applications. In the past, supposedly getting the job I was going for didn't require any type of degree. It just required some of your free time to learn some skills well, and then you could apply for a job and take whatever qualifying test they offered.

So I was forced into playing a game that I didn't want to play, spending over 4 years (not to mention I previously spent 1 1/2 years in technical school which got me nothing in graduation of 2010) to get a piece of paper that's basically just a key out of poverty, and still you have to get lucky to find the keyhole.

On top of that, while trying to get jobs/internship, I'd see a couple that basically just excluded white males, also Asian males. So living in small town with no good job opportunities, making barely above minimum wage, isn't low enough? I have to change my race or gender also? They could have just left the door open for anyone qualified, but no, screw white and Asian males, I guess.

So yeah, in the end it all ended up good after I found something, but f*** the system, that's all I wanna say.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on March 14, 2021, 07:52:18 PM
One more thought. Sorry.

But it's politics-related.

If hardcore extremist conservatives were in power, they probably would completely cancel pell grant/all college funding, and tell people to "pull themselves up by their bootstraps" (I like the spirit of it, but that's pie in the sky fantasy thinking in this world).

If SJW's identitarians were in charge, they would probably provide free college for everyone except certain demographics, such as white males (so I'd get nothing).

So yeah, f*** the extremists of both parties.






EDIT:
If I can summarize, sure, there are people who probably don't care or aspire much financially beyond being able to rent a room their whole life, but that is extremely limiting. Many things, hobbies, women/family, etc. will be unattainable, so that's why I suspect most people aspire to more than that.

So that's why I say getting the degree and getting out is probably going to be most people's priority, rather than taking the extra time to have fun learning stuff.

And many people (like me) had to work (typically five evenings a week) so we didn't get much time to dilly dally with our studies.

And the reason I bring up my experience (which Herman interprets as bragging) is to show that I'm not saying it out of an attitude of "ugh, college is hard so learning is bad, DERP." It's not that hard, it just requires a lot of time, and speedrunning is preferable, especially for people like me who weren't able to go to college directly after school and had to wait a few years... get the shit done and then focus on some of the random elective course they make you do later through self-teaching (have fun with it), when you aren't in such a rush to finish.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on March 15, 2021, 12:22:04 AM
Self-congratulatory certainly does not equal 'narcissism' nor is it exactly the same as 'bragging'.

You are very busy justifying your course of action in self-education, which comes across as self-congratulatory. Also because you feel the need to, may I say, put down the intrinsic value of a good college education, just because you didn't get one. The latter mechanism is understandable, but really no one is provoking you on that account.

You have a habit of talking about your intellectual accomplishments and your self-staggering IQ in a way no one else on GMG does. (There is usually one person in every online community who does this, in my experience.) This is what some people respond to.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 15, 2021, 03:12:05 AM
All I have been seeing in regards of US politics lately has been Dr. Seuss and Mr Potato Head. I had never heard of Dr. Seuss before. Apparently they are some children's books. I think I have heard of Mr Potato Head once referenced in one episode of The X-Files.

Polls indicate Republicans know more about Dr. Seuss decision than Covid relief... ...yeah, the Dems do suck at political branding...  ::)

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 15, 2021, 03:40:21 AM
Quote from: greg on March 14, 2021, 07:52:18 PM
If SJW's identitarians were in charge, they would probably provide free college for everyone except certain demographics, such as white males (so I'd get nothing).

Most of the time SJWs are so deep inside their cultural war bubble they don't even think about such social democratic ideas as tuition free education, but if they were in power and provided free college, that would include everyone including white males (yes, YOU). SJWs are not against white males. They are against white males having privileges other people don't have. Of course right-wingers try to frame it all being anti-white male (because one of the main purposes of these cultural wars for right-wingers is maintaining the privileges of white men!), but only fools fall for that crap.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 15, 2021, 03:51:39 AM
Quote from: The new erato on March 14, 2021, 08:13:04 AM
Higher education is for self improvement, growing up and understanding. With that, usually a career. If you go for it the other way round you will never grow up. QED in this thread it seems.

Disappointingly higher education never gave me a good paying career, but at least it gave me understanding of some things.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 15, 2021, 04:46:44 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on March 14, 2021, 10:54:02 AM
I would never knock the value of higher education.  I would attribute my own to giving me a basic understand of macroeconomics, (for example), a subject that isn't especially intuitive.  On the other hand my knowledge of history and political science is mostly self-learned.

Macroeconomics really is something people struggle to understand, because it is so far from our personal economics. I have noticed people in general don't understand multiplier effects in macroeconomics. People don't seem to understand how much it matter how and how fast money circulates in the society. People don't understand debt isn't "lack of money" in macroeconomics. It's more money elsewhere. It is about "where" the money is. The multiplier effects dictate largely how much money there is in the macroeconomy, or better how the amount of money changes in time, but since people in general don't know/understand this, it is easy to fearmonger with debt everytime someone tries to improve lives of regular people for example.

Having a higher education on one subject gives skills to educate yourself on other subjects. You know what it takes. You know how it feels. Self-education has it's benefits, especially when you have learned how you learn best. You don't waste your time on listening to tired professors presenting the things in a way that works badly for your brain. I learn new things best when I can formulate it the way my asperger-system-thinker-mind operates. I am really bad at just memorizing things. I need logical connections between things (to me things seem to be defined by the logical connections with other things so for me things don't kind of exist by themselves!). Understanding logical connections is my way of minimazing the need to memorize things. So, for me trying to learn new stuff from a textbook written by a non-system-thinker just listing things to memorize is pretty tiresome!

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 15, 2021, 05:42:50 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on March 13, 2021, 01:07:26 PM
And you seem to somehow think that a bunch of Youtube bobbleheads are all one needs for information and dismiss serious journalism or scholarly research and go so far as saying we should give "equal time" to the current equivalent of flat-earthers..

When it comes to US politics, serious journalism is a rarity. Most people who are supposed to do serious journalism are actually paid to manufacture consent on behalf of the establishment by ignoring or smearing facts and opinions of people who do scientific research. In this poor state of "MSM journalism", "Youtube bobbleheads" are actually often a superior source of information and opinions. If not serious journalism, at least it might fulfil the minimum requirements for actual journalism.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on March 15, 2021, 10:41:12 AM
I once had a class where the teacher asked who was doing school part time for 8 years, and half the class raised their hands.

Seeing that half of my 4 years was spent being forced to do classes which had little or nothing to do with my major, it could have been done in 2 years if only the important classes were required.

But for these people, they are technically spending 4 years of their life taking classes that have little or nothing to do with their major. Reasons may be financial/family/etc.

Maybe some of them are okay with it, but I'd imagine many of them are not. 4 years is a lot of time to spend on someone else's idea of having to mix education with training. And they are paying for it somehow. Probably not ideal to have such high hurdles in between them and middle class salaries.


Quote from: Herman on March 15, 2021, 12:22:04 AM
Self-congratulatory certainly does not equal 'narcissism' nor is it exactly the same as 'bragging'.

You are very busy justifying your course of action in self-education, which comes across as self-congratulatory. Also because you feel the need to, may I say, put down the intrinsic value of a good college education, just because you didn't get one. The latter mechanism is understandable, but really no one is provoking you on that account.

You have a habit of talking about your intellectual accomplishments and your self-staggering IQ in a way no one else on GMG does. (There is usually one person in every online community who does this, in my experience.) This is what some people respond to.
The classic Herman spin on things, and the predictable ignoring my point for bringing things up. Which I already explained, multiple times.

But the reasons aren't important to you, only your stuck viewpoint. If it makes you happy, just keep the same viewpoint and ignore everything, I guess.



Quotebecause you feel the need to, may I say, put down the intrinsic value of a good college education, just because you didn't get one.
Wtf lol.
That's a wild and bizarre assumption to make. Honestly I'm not just typing "lol" at that one, I'm actually laughing. Literally everything about that statement is wrong. Very bizarre.


Quote from: 71 dB on March 15, 2021, 03:40:21 AM
but if they were in power and provided free college, that would include everyone including white males (yes, YOU). SJWs are not against white males.
Well, I have my doubts in that type of timeline because of the many things I've seen, including the internship posting that I just mentioned that (illegally) excluded white and Asian males, since they are overrepresented.

Maybe you're not wrong. BUT I have serious doubts that they wouldn't, stuff like that seems like it would be a foreshadowing if SJWs came into power.


Quote from: 71 dB on March 15, 2021, 05:42:50 AM
When it comes to US politics, serious journalism is a rarity. Most people who are supposed to do serious journalism are actually paid to manufacture consent on behalf of the establishment by ignoring or smearing facts and opinions of people who do scientific research. In this poor state of "MSM journalism", "Youtube bobbleheads" are actually often a superior source of information and opinions. If not serious journalism, at least it might fulfil the minimum requirements for actual journalism.

Right. It's pathetic. Ragebait sells and keeps them in business. But it might be an industry-wide problem. Serious journalism doesn't get click revenue quite in the same way as shocking headlines do. I'm not sure what the solution to that problem would be...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on March 15, 2021, 11:28:37 AM
Quote from: greg on March 14, 2021, 07:06:03 PM
There's no magical quality that classroom learning has that online information doesn't have

As a teacher I'm going to disagree with this.  You might not have this experience but in class I have students discuss in peer groups and with me as well.  I ask questions to immediately make them think about the ideas they just learned.  I have them solve problems themselves after I show worked examples so that they can have immediate feedback on what they are doing right or wrong. 

Outside of class I hold office hours, we have a tutoring center available in the evenings, and the students can also ask each other for help.

It is very difficult to learn Physics at all without interaction with other people.  But I would say that any academic subject benefits from it. Passively learning by watching videos doesn't amount to much.  And you can learn how to actively engage with textbooks, but it is an acquired skill usually picked up in classes first.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 15, 2021, 11:48:50 AM
Quote from: DavidW on March 15, 2021, 11:28:37 AM
As a teacher I'm going to disagree with this.

As a former student who has experienced the magic (greg's word) I disagree, as well.

Quote from: DavidWIt is very difficult to learn Physics at all without interaction with other people.

And impossible to learn Music
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on March 15, 2021, 01:08:18 PM
Quote from: DavidW on March 15, 2021, 11:28:37 AM
As a teacher I'm going to disagree with this.  You might not have this experience but in class I have students discuss in peer groups and with me as well.  I ask questions to immediately make them think about the ideas they just learned.  I have them solve problems themselves after I show worked examples so that they can have immediate feedback on what they are doing right or wrong. 

Outside of class I hold office hours, we have a tutoring center available in the evenings, and the students can also ask each other for help.

It is very difficult to learn Physics at all without interaction with other people.  But I would say that any academic subject benefits from it. Passively learning by watching videos doesn't amount to much.  And you can learn how to actively engage with textbooks, but it is an acquired skill usually picked up in classes first.
Everyone's experience is different, for sure.

*In my tech school, before university, my friend complained that the teacher didn't teach nearly enough to make the class understandable and enjoyable enough. I didn't quite get it, the information is all in the book, so why need a teacher?

So when I finished I just gave him all the answers and it helped him graduate.  :P
*

Hey Herman, you can take that part out of context while ignoring my point and use that to judge me negatively again, which will invalidate my perspective and points.

Oh wait, I can do that for you and save you all the work!

Okay, so he's, umm.... let's see... "self-congratulating" about finishing tech school while not needing much help from the teacher. There! Done!


Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 15, 2021, 11:48:50 AM
And impossible to learn Music
Ummmm...? lol
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on March 15, 2021, 01:30:32 PM
Quote from: greg on March 15, 2021, 01:08:18 PM


Hey Herman, you can take that part out of context while ignoring my point



Well, I find you have managed to make it all about yourself again, and how great you are (title of the topic: USA politics > Greg about Greg) so I'm not interested, sorry.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on March 15, 2021, 01:56:22 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 15, 2021, 11:48:50 AM
As a former student who has experienced the magic (greg's word) I disagree, as well.

And impossible to learn Music

And it's just flat out wrong.  I'm not aware of any research that shows that online learning has equal outcomes to in-person learning, and quite a lot of research to the contrary. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 15, 2021, 02:14:21 PM
Quote from: Herman on March 15, 2021, 01:30:32 PM
Well, I find you have managed to make it all about yourself again, and how great you are (title of the topic: USA politics > Greg about Greg) so I'm not interested, sorry.

Herr "ich bin sehr klug!"
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on March 15, 2021, 02:14:52 PM
Quote from: greg on March 15, 2021, 10:41:12 AM

Seeing that half of my 4 years was spent being forced to do classes which had little or nothing to do with my major, it could have been done in 2 years if only the important classes were required.


So you're the kid in school who was always saying "why do I have to learn x if I'm never going to get a job doing x".
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 15, 2021, 02:16:44 PM
Quote from: greg on March 15, 2021, 10:41:12 AMWell, I have my doubts in that type of timeline because of the many things I've seen, including the internship posting that I just mentioned that (illegally) excluded white and Asian males, since they are overrepresented.

Maybe you're not wrong. BUT I have serious doubts that they wouldn't, stuff like that seems like it would be a foreshadowing if SJWs came into power.

Well, white and Asian males are overrepresented because of the current system. Tuition free education would alleviate/fix that problem and SJWs wouldn't have to make those posts anymore.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on March 15, 2021, 02:19:26 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 15, 2021, 05:42:50 AM
When it comes to US politics, serious journalism is a rarity. Most people who are supposed to do serious journalism are actually paid to manufacture consent on behalf of the establishment by ignoring or smearing facts and opinions of people who do scientific research. In this poor state of "MSM journalism", "Youtube bobbleheads" are actually often a superior source of information and opinions. If not serious journalism, at least it might fulfil the minimum requirements for actual journalism.

We've been through this a few times now, and you know that I know that you've got no idea how much serious journalism there is out there because you don't read any of it, you take the easy road of believing your YT personalities that its all worthless and you should just stick with them and they'll tell you which lazy buzzwords you can use to justify not taking the time to read.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on March 15, 2021, 02:32:04 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 15, 2021, 02:27:16 PM
Do you really think I follow some morons on Youtube who pull their opinions out of their hat or ass? Where do you think they get their information from? These Youtubers search for articles by serious journalists for work. Yes, this is certainly easier.

Yes they get it from the very sources they then have you sweepingly dismiss. They're getting it from people who do the actual legwork and interviews rather than bloviating on other peoples work.

Lead you to the sources, do they? Which journalists do you read regularly now they've led you to them?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on March 15, 2021, 02:58:08 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 15, 2021, 02:43:22 PM
IAlso, it doesn't matter what I follow.

Well that's not true if you're here to say how very informed you are and how very uninformed everyone else is.

But whatever. I'm bored with this already and I don't respect your manifestly unread and simplistic worldview.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on March 15, 2021, 03:25:02 PM
Quote from: greg on March 15, 2021, 01:08:18 PM
Ummmm...? lol
Let me revise that reaction.
It's waaaaaaay different nowadays that 20+ years ago. Probably mostly true that you would need an actual teacher to learn music well. Nowadays, it really just depends on what you're trying to do.


Quote from: Herman on March 15, 2021, 01:30:32 PM
Well, I find you have managed to make it all about yourself again, and how great you are (title of the topic: USA politics > Greg about Greg) so I'm not interested, sorry.
You've managed to do the same thing again.
It's not about me, I'm just using myself as an example for the point I was making about debt slavery and the college system.


Quote from: SimonNZ on March 15, 2021, 02:14:52 PM
So you're the kid in school who was always saying "why do I have to learn x if I'm never going to get a job doing x".
I like learning. I don't like to be forced to learn stuff when I am focused on other things. Is that unreasonable?
And why exactly would asking that question be a bad thing? Do you completely not value your own time and ability to choose what to learn?



Quote from: 71 dB on March 15, 2021, 02:16:44 PM
Tuition free education would alleviate/fix that problem and SJWs wouldn't have to make those posts anymore.
It would probably help.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 15, 2021, 03:36:23 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 15, 2021, 02:27:16 PM
Do you really think I follow some morons on Youtube who pull their opinions out of their hat or ass? Where do you think they get their information from? These Youtubers search for articles by serious journalists for work. Yes, this is certainly easier.  Also, a lot of stuff is behind paywalls.

Lefties were sceptical about Biden doing $15 minimum wage. $15 minimum wage did not happen. Lefties were right, AGAIN!

Hasn't happened yet.

If lefties banked on this happening within a month of Biden's inauguration, while a pandemic is raging, lefties should extract their heads from out their large colons.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 15, 2021, 03:37:47 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 15, 2021, 02:43:22 PM
I don't memorize names.

You don't remember any?  when's the last time you read one? Or don't you "memorize dates," either?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 15, 2021, 04:36:47 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 15, 2021, 03:36:23 PM
Hasn't happened yet.

Yep, and won't happen in the near future. This was the chance, because this was a must pass bill. The Dems managed to make the bill worse in the process and still got zero Republican votes. The Dems will get Republican votes only if they are trying to pass Republican legislation.

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 15, 2021, 03:36:23 PMIf lefties banked on this happening within a month of Biden's inauguration, while a pandemic is raging, lefties should extract their heads from out their large colons.

The pandemic is actually a brilliant moment to pass things like this, because most people feel the need for it on their skin. The better times (for regular people), the less needed lefty stuff appears to people. Biden + Harris could have made $15 happen (using presidential influence) if they really wanted it, but they don't really want it. They work for the chamber of commerce, not for people making $7.25/hr.

If $15 was this hard now, wait for 2022 when the Republicans probably take the Senate back and $15 becomes impossible.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 15, 2021, 04:51:39 PM
Max Blumenthal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Blumenthal

https://thegrayzone.com/2021/03/08/biden-iran-envoy-starving-civilians-pain-sanctions/
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on March 15, 2021, 05:29:46 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 15, 2021, 04:51:39 PM
Max Blumenthal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Blumenthal

https://thegrayzone.com/2021/03/08/biden-iran-envoy-starving-civilians-pain-sanctions/

Need to do better. Max B is nowadays just another propagandist for Assad and Iran.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 15, 2021, 07:04:10 PM
Quote from: JBS on March 15, 2021, 05:29:46 PM
Need to do better. Max B is nowadays just another propagandist for Assad and Iran.

I don't need to do anything. I can just ignore US politics and who is propagandist for who. Facts don't matter anymore. Everyone is a propagandist according to someone these days. I am out of this thread. Why did I even bother...

Who is better? Those paid "journalists" at WP thinking war with Iran is a good idea?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 16, 2021, 09:07:55 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 15, 2021, 04:46:44 AM
Macroeconomics really is something people struggle to understand, because it is so far from our personal economics. I have noticed people in general don't understand multiplier effects in macroeconomics. People don't seem to understand how much it matter how and how fast money circulates in the society. People don't understand debt isn't "lack of money" in macroeconomics. It's more money elsewhere. It is about "where" the money is. The multiplier effects dictate largely how much money there is in the macroeconomy, or better how the amount of money changes in time, but since people in general don't know/understand this, it is easy to fearmonger with debt everytime someone tries to improve lives of regular people for example.

     Lack of money is what happens when the government taxes back its debt. Money is what happens when it doesn't. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/smiley.gif)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on March 16, 2021, 09:43:51 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 15, 2021, 07:04:10 PM
I don't need to do anything. I can just ignore US politics and who is propagandist for who. Facts don't matter anymore. Everyone is a propagandist according to someone these days. I am out of this thread. Why did I even bother...

Who is better? Those paid "journalists" at WP thinking war with Iran is a good idea?

RT and Sputnik are propaganda media supporting the Russian regime, their only function is to support it and to weaken/demoralize the West. They excel in producing outright lies/"evidence", and the leader of RT has stated that RT is a weapon on a par with the Russian military, which is far from any good principles of journalism. Obvious examples have been hiding the Russian invasion of Ukraine, lying about events in Ukraine generally and the MH17 shoot down, about the atrocities of the Assad regime, trying to support and inflate right wing extremism in Europe, etc. etc. They are actually protagonists of post-factual journalism.

RT and Sputnik associations are therefore disqualifying sources, when you encounter them, unless you also support what is going on in Russia politically.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 16, 2021, 09:53:55 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on March 16, 2021, 09:43:51 AM
RT and Sputnik are propaganda media supporting the Russian regime, their only function is to support it and to weaken/demoralize the West. They excell in producing outright lies/"evidence", and the leader of RT has stated that RT is a weapon on a par with the Russian military, which is far from any good principles of journalism. Obvious examples have been hiding the Russian invasion of Ukraine, lying about events in Ukraine generally and the MH17 shoot down, about the atrocities of the Assad regime, trying to support and inflate right wing extremism in Europe, etc. etc.

RT and Sputnik associations are therefore disqualifying sources, when you encounter them, unless you also support what is going on in Russia politically.

I know this. I know how to be critical. However, it turns out that state run propaganda isn't as bad as corporate propaganda. Surprising perhaps, but that's how it seems to be. You can criticize me when I deny Russian invasion of Ukraine. I haven't done so and I won't. I am European.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 16, 2021, 09:56:59 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 16, 2021, 09:53:55 AM
I know this. I know how to be critical.

Except viz. YouTube
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 16, 2021, 10:23:11 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 16, 2021, 09:56:59 AM
Except viz. YouTube

Says someone to whom WP op-eds are to be trusted as face value...  ::)

Maybe you think I believe everything I see on Youtube. I don't. Anyway, this is really stupid, because we are NOT debating about any political issues. We are trying to discredit each other creating a TOXIC forum. We are like children! I'd like to stop it, but my credibility is being constantly challenged in a mean tone just because I prefer to get my information elsewhere, outside places considered "trustful" by the establishment! As if someone getting paid by the military industry complex would do "better" journalism about Iran than someone working for RT. Russia and the US both have interests in the middle east.

Sorry, if I have been arrogant at some point. I just assumed all those countless of hours I spend on following US politics would have given me some insight into things. Whatever. I am so tired of US politics at this point.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: steve ridgway on March 16, 2021, 10:27:33 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 16, 2021, 10:23:11 AM
I just assumed all those countless of hours I spend on following US politics would have given me some insight into things.

Maybe the insight that everyone has their own agenda and it's mostly about deceiving others for money. :-\
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 16, 2021, 10:32:09 AM
Quote from: steve ridgway on March 16, 2021, 10:27:33 AM
Maybe the insight that everyone has their own agenda and it's mostly about deceiving others for money. :-\

When everybody are lying, what is not said is the truth.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: steve ridgway on March 16, 2021, 10:39:50 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 16, 2021, 10:32:09 AM
When everybody are lying, what is not said is the truth.

Nature does not speak in words. 0:)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 16, 2021, 11:04:15 AM
Quote from: steve ridgway on March 16, 2021, 10:39:50 AM
Nature does not speak in words. 0:)

My budgie (hatched in the USA) expresses agreement.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on March 16, 2021, 11:36:04 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 15, 2021, 05:42:50 AM
When it comes to US politics, serious journalism is a rarity.

Yes that is mostly because people refuse to support serious journalism by buying subscriptions to newspapers.  Especially local newspaper where most of the news is generated and then re-reported in the big national papers.  And you know how much subscriptions cost?  Usually only $5-10 a month.  And when you turn to YT instead of paying a happy meal price once a month another greedy hedge fund like Alden Global Capital buys up and tears up another newspaper.  And when you watch YT you are getting extreme simplification, cherry picking, biased and highly opinionated "reporting."  Just think about it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on March 16, 2021, 12:02:57 PM
Quote from: DavidW on March 16, 2021, 11:36:04 AM
Yes that is mostly because people refuse to support serious journalism by buying subscriptions to newspapers.  Especially local newspaper where most of the news is generated and then re-reported in the big national papers.  And you know how much subscriptions cost?  Usually only $5-10 a month.  And when you turn to YT instead of paying a happy meal price once a month another greedy hedge fund like Alden Global Capital buys up and tears up another newspaper.  And when you watch YT you are getting extreme simplification, cherry picking, biased and highly opinionated "reporting."  Just think about it.

Yes
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on March 16, 2021, 01:58:17 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 16, 2021, 10:23:11 AM
Anyway, this is really stupid, because we are NOT debating about any political issues. We are trying to discredit each other creating a TOXIC forum. We are like children! I'd like to stop it, but my credibility is being constantly challenged in a mean tone just because I prefer to get my information elsewhere, outside places considered "trustful" by the establishment!
Par for the course here.


Quote from: DavidW on March 16, 2021, 11:36:04 AM
Yes that is mostly because people refuse to support serious journalism by buying subscriptions to newspapers.  Especially local newspaper where most of the news is generated and then re-reported in the big national papers.  And you know how much subscriptions cost?  Usually only $5-10 a month.  And when you turn to YT instead of paying a happy meal price once a month another greedy hedge fund like Alden Global Capital buys up and tears up another newspaper.  And when you watch YT you are getting extreme simplification, cherry picking, biased and highly opinionated "reporting."  Just think about it.
Interesting point.
It may be the fault of the collective for not enough people paying for the subscription. You could also add, people don't need to click on and share incendiary ragebait headlines online.

Then at that point, since you can't really control the actions of millions of people (free stuff is $5-10 cheaper a month than stuff that is $5-10, so most people will just go with whatever is free/aka ad-supported), then some sort of system or business model would have to be put into place to change things. Not sure what, though.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on March 17, 2021, 03:58:24 AM
"Trump seemed to channel this body of thought when he seized upon a moral panic about a few transparently silly stories—"fake news"—and created a catchphrase to smear serious journalists. While we in the media wrung our hands at the idea that people might believe the Pope had endorsed Trump, Trump himself realized that the real danger—and for him, the real opportunity—was different. It was not that people would believe such nonsense, but that they could be persuaded to disbelieve authoritative, carefully sourced journalism."

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/03/the-conspiracy-theorists-problem-isnt-what-they-believe/618285/
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 17, 2021, 04:51:03 AM
Quote from: DavidW on March 16, 2021, 11:36:04 AM
Yes that is mostly because people refuse to support serious journalism by buying subscriptions to newspapers.  Especially local newspaper where most of the news is generated and then re-reported in the big national papers.  And you know how much subscriptions cost?  Usually only $5-10 a month.  And when you turn to YT instead of paying a happy meal price once a month another greedy hedge fund like Alden Global Capital buys up and tears up another newspaper.  And when you watch YT you are getting extreme simplification, cherry picking, biased and highly opinionated "reporting."  Just think about it.

The World has changed. Nowadays people pay for other kind of subscriptions such a Youtube channel memberships.

People don't need to know every small thing that happens in the nation. People in Florida don't need to know if a bank has been robbed in Nevada.
The real problem is agenda-based narratives, the way news are told. Often journalists have to write stories in ways they don't agree with just to keep their job. If you have to feed your family you perhaps forced to do things you wouldn't do otherwise so you lie to people.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on March 17, 2021, 05:39:57 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 17, 2021, 04:51:03 AM
(...)
The real problem is agenda-based narratives, the way news are told. Often journalists have to write stories in ways they don't agree with just to keep their job. If you have to feed your family you perhaps forced to do things you wouldn't do otherwise so you lie to people.

Journalism has always had those problems, including sensationalism of the entertaining/irrelevant sort  - it's described in depth say in French novels back in mid-19th century. Still, good journalistic principles of criticism and factual reporting have also existed. But it's not necessarily served on a platter, as an appetizing, sensationalist snack. There's increased attention nowadays towards constructive journalism too, opening for and focusing on solutions in news stories problems, after hearing several sides of a conflict for example, but it's probably likely to remain a niche overall.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 17, 2021, 07:11:59 AM
Mitch McConnell says the Republicans are going to do all of their agenda when they are in power if the Dems end the Filibuster. Well, that's actually what is supposed to happen in democracy: If you win you get to do your agenda! However, both the Dems and the Reps don't really want to do their whole agenda, but only the parts approved by the Chamber of Commerce. Trump didn't get the Wall built and Biden won't get $15 living wage passed, because the Chamber of Commerce doesn't want those happen. Filibuster was created to give excuses to not get legislation regular people want passed.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on March 17, 2021, 07:21:05 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 17, 2021, 04:51:03 AM
The World has changed. Nowadays people pay for other kind of subscriptions such a Youtube channel memberships.

People don't need to know every small thing that happens in the nation. People in Florida don't need to know if a bank has been robbed in Nevada.

newspapers don't spend a lot of space on bank robberies. Also, you don't have to read every word that's in a paper. You learn how to read a paper and what to skip.
Youtube is much more time consuming.
Quote
The real problem is agenda-based narratives, the way news are told. Often journalists have to write stories in ways they don't agree with just to keep their job. If you have to feed your family you perhaps forced to do things you wouldn't do otherwise so you lie to people.

youtube and podcasts are generally much more agenda driven than papers like the Times or the Post, because those channels cater to niche groups.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on March 17, 2021, 08:42:44 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 17, 2021, 04:51:03 AM
Nowadays people pay for other kind of subscriptions such a Youtube channel memberships.

lol those are free.

It is one thing to acknowledge that there are biases baked into journalism but subtle and perhaps even subconscious (NYTimes, Wall Street Journal) and extreme agenda-based reporting (MSNBC, Fox News) and another thing to accuse them of all being liars.  That is just stupidly paranoid and really straight from the Trump playbook. 

I completely agree with Herman's post and I'll add this.

To be a journalist for a major newspaper you usually need to have
(a) journalism degree or something similar
(b) previous experience
(c) sources for your reporting
(d) an editor and fact checker

To be a Youtuber you need to have
(a) a camera
(b) a microphone
(c) a clear agenda or bias to build your subscriber base
(d) undisclosed sponsors

Think about it.  Oh and that doesn't even get into the YouTube algorithm subtly changing your behavior as it recommends similar videos to what you watch (but perhaps even more fringe).  No matter how intelligent you are, if you can't admit that you're just an animal prone to psychological tricks and manipulation that have proven to work against all people then you will be manipulated.  You just won't even know it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 17, 2021, 08:51:31 AM
Quote from: Herman on March 17, 2021, 03:58:24 AM
"Trump seemed to channel this body of thought when he seized upon a moral panic about a few transparently silly stories—"fake news"—and created a catchphrase to smear serious journalists. While we in the media wrung our hands at the idea that people might believe the Pope had endorsed Trump, Trump himself realized that the real danger—and for him, the real opportunity—was different. It was not that people would believe such nonsense, but that they could be persuaded to disbelieve authoritative, carefully sourced journalism."

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/03/the-conspiracy-theorists-problem-isnt-what-they-believe/618285/ (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/03/the-conspiracy-theorists-problem-isnt-what-they-believe/618285/)

Exactly.  And here we have intellectuals priding themselves upon their sneering at proper journalism.
Trump sez "fake news" Another sez "corporate media" two sides of the same wooden nickel.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on March 17, 2021, 08:56:50 AM
Quote from: DavidW on March 17, 2021, 08:42:44 AM
lol those are free.

It is one thing to acknowledge that there are biases baked into journalism but subtle and perhaps even subconscious (NYTimes, Wall Street Journal) and extreme agenda-based reporting (MSNBC, Fox News) and another thing to accuse them of all being liars.  That is just stupidly paranoid and really straight from the Trump playbook. 

I completely agree with Herman's post and I'll add this.

To be a journalist for a major newspaper you usually need to have
(a) journalism degree or something similar
(b) previous experience
(c) sources for your reporting
(d) an editor and fact checker

At papers like the NY Times and the Wa Post the peer control is massive. There are hundreds of reporters reading each other's stuff and they will let it know if the reporting doesn't stack up.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 17, 2021, 09:52:27 AM
Quote from: Herman on March 17, 2021, 07:21:05 AM
newspapers don't spend a lot of space on bank robberies. Also, you don't have to read every word that's in a paper. You learn how to read a paper and what to skip.
Youtube is much more time consuming.
youtube and podcasts are generally much more agenda driven than papers like the Times or the Post, because those channels cater to niche groups.

"Youtube is much more time consuming," and thus, too, more addictive for their confirmation-bias marks.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 17, 2021, 11:10:30 AM
Quote from: Herman on March 17, 2021, 07:21:05 AM
newspapers don't spend a lot of space on bank robberies. Also, you don't have to read every word that's in a paper. You learn how to read a paper and what to skip.

Yeah, 20 years ago I learned to skip so much eventually I read almost nothing. So I ended my subscription.

Quote from: Herman on March 17, 2021, 07:21:05 AMYoutube is much more time consuming.
Yes, when you watch the cat videos Youtube recommends.  ;D

Quote from: Herman on March 17, 2021, 07:21:05 AMYoutube and podcasts are generally much more agenda driven than papers like the Times or the Post, because those channels cater to niche groups.

At least certain agendas have a platform. For example, MSM media is against medicare for all, because they get add money from insurance companies and Big Pharma. In general Youtubers don't get that kind of money so they can be pro-medicare for all. Do your research. What does science and studies say about things and how well does MSM compare to Youtubers in regards of those facts? If MSM is correct, I guess all other western countries are idiots fot not having something that only the US has, costs 2 times more and doesn't covers everyone. Are we Finns stupid for not having medical bankruptcies? Because according to the Times we are.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 17, 2021, 11:17:40 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 17, 2021, 11:10:30 AM
At least certain agendas have a platform. For example, MSM media is against medicare for all

This statement gauges your critical faculties to a nicety.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 17, 2021, 11:28:51 AM
Quote from: DavidW on March 17, 2021, 08:42:44 AM
lol those are free.

I mean you can pay for subscription and have additional member only content etc.

Quote from: DavidW on March 17, 2021, 08:42:44 AMIt is one thing to acknowledge that there are biases baked into journalism but subtle and perhaps even subconscious (NYTimes, Wall Street Journal) and extreme agenda-based reporting (MSNBC, Fox News) and another thing to accuse them of all being liars.  That is just stupidly paranoid and really straight from the Trump playbook. 

I completely agree with Herman's post and I'll add this.

To be a journalist for a major newspaper you usually need to have
(a) journalism degree or something similar
(b) previous experience
(c) sources for your reporting
(d) an editor and fact checker

To be a Youtuber you need to have
(a) a camera
(b) a microphone
(c) a clear agenda or bias to build your subscriber base
(d) undisclosed sponsors

Think about it.  Oh and that doesn't even get into the YouTube algorithm subtly changing your behavior as it recommends similar videos to what you watch (but perhaps even more fringe).  No matter how intelligent you are, if you can't admit that you're just an animal prone to psychological tricks and manipulation that have proven to work against all people then you will be manipulated.  You just won't even know it.

You trust "authorities". I don't. I don't care WHO says something. I care about what is said. People without education might have excellent insight about some things such as what does it mean to live without education. When there are adds, there is money and money obscures things. It happens with "real" journalists and it happens with Youtubers. Where the money is from dictates how it obscures things. Some getting money from military industry complex WILL WRITE PRO-WAR ARTICLES!!! If you don't, you stop getting money!

There are many kind of Youtubers form Alex Jones to Rational National. I use my head to figure out who is full of bs and who isn't. You should do the same instead of just trusting "authorities" because they have HARVARD education.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 17, 2021, 11:42:14 AM
Prime time cable news shows not doing well.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 17, 2021, 11:50:05 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 17, 2021, 11:17:40 AM
This statement gauges your critical faculties to a nicety.

Your endless "one-liners" reflect your feelings rather than any meaningful substance. I never know what you think about the issues I am talking about. I only know you think I am an idiot and you don't agree with me. Well, okay Karl, but if all I got from you is you think I am an idiot then I am not interested arguing with you. Sorry.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 17, 2021, 12:46:26 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 17, 2021, 11:50:05 AM
Your endless "one-liners" reflect your feelings rather than any meaningful substance. I never know what you think about the issues I am talking about. I only know you think I am an idiot and you don't agree with me. Well, okay Karl, but if all I got from you is you think I am an idiot then I am not interested arguing with you. Sorry.

No, Poju, I don't think you're an idiot. I think you're blind both to your own biases, and to the intellectually unreliable agitprop of some of your preferred YouTube sources.
To have little confidence in your critical faculties is a far cry from thinking you an idiot.

And, when one sentence serves the purpose, I feel no obligation to stretch to a second.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 17, 2021, 12:51:25 PM
The MSM supposedly being opposed as a monolith to Medicare for all, is a self-serving fantasy.
And you can examine and reevaluate that fantasy, and how, why and whence you imbibed that fantasy, or not. To quote Wanda Dershowitz (Jamie Lee Curtis): What would Plato do?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on March 17, 2021, 02:36:59 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 17, 2021, 04:51:03 AM
The World has changed. Nowadays people pay for other kind of subscriptions such a Youtube channel memberships.
There are also some stories that are filmed, which can be watched fully on youtube or twitter, for free.

The journalists can provide some context, but there's nothing quite like going to the source to see the full video. Better to see things for yourself than just follow what a journalist tells you/wants you to believe.

So that is another advantage of youtube/twitter that I don't think was mentioned...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 17, 2021, 02:50:40 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 17, 2021, 12:46:26 PM
No, Poju, I don't think you're an idiot. I think you're blind both to your own biases, and to the intellectually unreliable agitprop of some of your preferred YouTube sources.
To have little confidence in your critical faculties is a far cry from thinking you an idiot.

And, when one sentence serves the purpose, I feel no obligation to stretch to a second.

Everyone has got a bias. You are lying if you say you don't have one yourself. My bias is green/left. I say it openly so people know where I'm coming from. I can argue for my positions and I am ready to admit when I am wrong. Most of my political opinions are NOT from Youtubers. I had them LONG BEFORE Youtube existed. I started forming political opinions back when I was a teenager, in the 80's. What I have learned from Youtubers and  from following US politics more closely is what kind of country the US is, but Youtubers haven't really changed my political views in general, but they have changed completely my views about the US. When Covid-19 hit the World a year ago, I knew the US will be hit really hard (oligarchy + for profit healthcare + incompetent leadership) and it happened. Last summer I argued half of Covid-19 related deaths in the US could have been avoided with competent leadership. Now, experts estimate 40 % of deaths could have been avoided. I was pretty close. I was sceptical about Biden supporting $15 living wage beyond campaign talk. Well, how hard did he fight for it? Biden also campaigned for public option, didn't he? Strange, because he hasn't talked about it after the election! He dropped it instantly! Instead the new relief package funnels billions to COBRA (straight into the pockets of insurance companies) just like the oligarchs want. The evidence supports my views and biases and when it stops supporting I know something is wrong with my information sources.

It doesn't matter what politicians say. How they vote and fight is what counts. That's why corrupt politicians don't want progressive politices voted for even when they know they have the votes to block them. It exposes them as bullshitters and voters know to vote them out.

I'm sorry if you don't have confidence in my critical faculties. It makes my confidence in my ability to express myself clearly drop. I do not "just believe" everything Cenk Uygur says. I think about it to check if it makes sense or not. Most of the time it does. Sometime it doesn't ("Dutch people live in Denmark."  ;D )

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on March 17, 2021, 03:44:25 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 17, 2021, 11:10:30 AM

At least certain agendas have a platform. For example, MSM media is against medicare for all, because they get add money from insurance companies and Big Pharma.

Once again: you have no idea what "the mainstream media" says about medicare for all, you simply accept your Youtubers saying that a large diverse group of professional journalists should be  sweepingly dismissed... so you'll stick with them.

Quote from: 71 dB on March 17, 2021, 11:28:51 AM

You trust "authorities". I don't. I don't care WHO says something. I care about what is said.

Confirmation bias.

Quote from: 71 dB on March 17, 2021, 02:50:40 PM
I do not "just believe" everything Cenk Uygur says. I think about it to check if it makes sense or not.


Confirmation bias.

Quote from: 71 dB on March 15, 2021, 07:04:10 PM
I am out of this thread. Why did I even bother...


Please.


Quote from: greg on March 17, 2021, 02:36:59 PM
There are also some stories that are filmed, which can be watched fully on youtube or twitter, for free.

The journalists can provide some context, but there's nothing quite like going to the source to see the full video. Better to see things for yourself than just follow what a journalist tells you/wants you to believe.

So that is another advantage of youtube/twitter that I don't think was mentioned...

"Mainstream" tv reporters use those crowd-sourced videos in their reportage...and then provide the various forms of context that "citizen journalist" couldn't or wouldn't.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 17, 2021, 03:57:27 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on March 17, 2021, 03:44:25 PM
Once again: you have no idea what "the mainstream media" says about medicare for all, you simply accept your Youtubers saying that a large diverse group of professional journalists should be  sweepingly dismissed... so you'll stick with them.

I think I have a general idea of what "the mainstream media" says about medicare for all because I watch Youtubers comment what "the mainstream media" says.

Quote from: SimonNZ on March 17, 2021, 03:44:25 PMConfirmation bias.

Applies to everyone, not only me.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 17, 2021, 04:00:51 PM
Quote from: greg on March 17, 2021, 02:36:59 PM
There are also some stories that are filmed, which can be watched fully on youtube or twitter, for free.

The journalists can provide some context, but there's nothing quite like going to the source to see the full video. Better to see things for yourself than just follow what a journalist tells you/wants you to believe.

So that is another advantage of youtube/twitter that I don't think was mentioned...

John Farina's footage for Status Coup of the insurrection was epic and used (licenced) widely.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on March 17, 2021, 04:08:45 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 17, 2021, 03:57:27 PM
I think I have a general idea of what "the mainstream media" says about medicare for all because I watch Youtubers comment what "the mainstream media" says.


And again:

Quote from: SimonNZ on March 17, 2021, 03:44:25 PM
Once again: you have no idea what "the mainstream media" says about medicare for all, you simply accept your Youtubers saying that a large diverse group of professional journalists should be  sweepingly dismissed... so you'll stick with them.


Quote from: 71 dB on March 17, 2021, 03:57:27 PM

Applies to everyone, not only me.


Others would (or should)look to change their ways if they saw it in themselves, not wear it proudly like a badge. This pride in your bias is why people find your critical abilities missing.

Quote from: 71 dB on March 15, 2021, 07:04:10 PM
I am out of this thread. Why did I even bother...


Really. Please.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 17, 2021, 04:15:12 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on March 17, 2021, 04:08:45 PM
This pride in your bias is why people find your critical abilities missing.


What pride?  ::)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 17, 2021, 04:35:44 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on March 17, 2021, 03:44:25 PM
Once again: you have no idea what "the mainstream media" says about medicare for all, you simply accept your Youtubers saying that a large diverse group of professional journalists should be  sweepingly dismissed... so you'll stick with them.

The Youtubers I follow praise some journalism whenever there is reason for that. That's about 10 % of it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on March 18, 2021, 04:39:36 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 17, 2021, 11:10:30 AM
...
At least certain agendas have a platform. For example, MSM media is against medicare for all, because they get add money from insurance companies and Big Pharma. In general Youtubers don't get that kind of money so they can be pro-medicare for all. Do your research. What does science and studies say about things and how well does MSM compare to Youtubers in regards of those facts? If MSM is correct, I guess all other western countries are idiots fot not having something that only the US has, costs 2 times more and doesn't covers everyone. Are we Finns stupid for not having medical bankruptcies? Because according to the Times we are.

Americans spend more on their healthcare overall than any other country by a factor of almost 2X.  That without better outcomes for their population as a whole.  Where does that money go?  It goes to profits to the healthcare industry, (healthcare delivery, drug companies, insurance companies).  These folks have tremendous, greed-drive interest in lobbying Congress to against universal healthcare.

Meanwhile scurrilous alt-Right and conservative sources sources -- not so much the MSM -- feed Americans an endless stream of lies about other countries' universal healthcare by.  Canada's healthcare in particular gets a lot of slander from conservatives source given we are their next door neighbors.

The huge irony is that the USA spends not only more private money on healthcare but also more public money than most other OECD countries.


Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 18, 2021, 06:35:29 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 15, 2021, 04:51:39 PM
Max Blumenthal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Blumenthal

https://thegrayzone.com/2021/03/08/biden-iran-envoy-starving-civilians-pain-sanctions/

     There's an interesting piece in the Atlantic about Iran policy.

     The Princeton Historian Mugged by Reality (https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:AYpb7uUbWTIJ:https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/03/story-xiyue-wang-iran-graduate-student-hostage/618298/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-b-1-d)

His captors' complete indifference to his actual guilt or innocence rapidly revealed itself. They told him, matter-of-factly, that he was being kept solely for purposes of exchange. The regime that held him, Wang came to feel, had no intention of altering its behavior if the United States made concessions: This was its true self, and not the product of American aggression. He said he once thought that the dreadful state of Iran was "all because of something we did wrong to them," and that a thawing of ties would empower Iranian moderates. But that view relied on what he called a "mirage" of moderation within the Iranian government. "I slowly saw: They don't want to be our friends. They don't want to reconcile." In prison he watched a great deal of state propaganda. "They say it clearly," he told me. "They want us as an enemy, because that is the reason for their existence." To hope that Iran will stop behaving like an enemy is to hope that it will suddenly decide not to exist anymore.

Unlike many American hostages, Wang was allowed to mix with the general inmate population, a motley bunch of political prisoners and financial criminals whose stories he learned in detail. (One of them spoke French, and taught Wang well enough for him to berate the Iranian ambassador in Zurich.) To Wang's surprise, he found that activities he thought the regime would appreciate—pursuing business and cultural ties with foreign countries, the kind of thing that his own university encouraged by sending him to Iran—often landed people in prison. The Iranian regime "needs people outside Iran to press progressive politicians for lifting of sanctions," Wang said. But if you are in Iran and call for greater engagement, you are a threat to a regime based on its enmity with America, and you end up in a cell in Evin. "They ruthlessly suppress people who do that in Iran. And if you are arrested with them, you will realize there are so many Iranians [imprisoned] because they engage with the West."


     A realistic assessment of Iranian intentions should be the basis for policy. That means we'll have to give up on the "reformers vs hard-liners" myth.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 18, 2021, 06:43:26 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 17, 2021, 03:57:27 PM
I think I have a general idea of what "the mainstream media" says about medicare for all because I watch Youtubers comment what "the mainstream media" says.

Correction: You know what the YouTubers have to say about it (The observations of confirmation bias stand).

You're dancing quite the tarantella to avoid examining what a ridiculous remark "MSM media is against medicare for all" is.

And, significantly, you do not offer any MSM examples in any defense. You just double down with "I heard it on YouTube, it's gotta be true," indifferent to the light this sheds on your critical faculties.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 18, 2021, 07:08:19 AM

     The "MSM" hasn't evinced much enthusiasm for MfA. It's treated as an unrealistic proposal by the left Dems even at MSNBC.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 18, 2021, 07:22:14 AM
You know both these things already, Ernie, but "lack of enthusiasm for" ≠ "MSM media is against medicare for all"

And to conclude that MfA is unrealistic is certainly reasonable. e.g., our JBS has repeatedly argued that it may not be the best means of insuring all Americans.

Maybe JBS needs a YouTube channel?...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 18, 2021, 08:28:51 AM

     I sometimes favor unrealistic policies, like pot legalization and same sex marriage. Popular support made them realistic, and then real. I could take that attitude about MfA, except that acceptable alternatives are likely to develop and I'm more interested in getting the good thing than the means of getting it. I think of MfA as a terrible no good thing to frighten the policy gurus into insuring everyone. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/cheesy.gif)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 18, 2021, 08:56:04 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on March 18, 2021, 04:39:36 AM
Americans spend more on their healthcare overall than any other country by a factor of almost 2X.  That without better outcomes for their population as a whole.  Where does that money go?  It goes to profits to the healthcare industry, (healthcare delivery, drug companies, insurance companies).  These folks have tremendous, greed-drive interest in lobbying Congress to against universal healthcare.

Meanwhile scurrilous alt-Right and conservative sources sources -- not so much the MSM -- feed Americans an endless stream of lies about other countries' universal healthcare by.  Canada's healthcare in particular gets a lot of slander from conservatives source given we are their next door neighbors.

The huge irony is that the USA spends not only more private money on healthcare but also more public money than most other OECD countries.

I have been saying this for years here and half of the time I am told I am a victim of confirmation bias and I live inside the lefty Youtuber's bubble. The facts are inside someone's bubble. Someone's bubble contains the truth or otherwise everybody is wrong. I am especially surprised about the hostility from SimonNZ given the fact that the healthcare system in the New Zealand is nothing like in the US and much cheaper. Why SimonNZ defends the US healthcare system is so weird to me. Maybe he owns stocks of Big Pharma?  ::)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on March 18, 2021, 09:11:15 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 18, 2021, 08:56:04 AM
Someone's bubble contains the truth or otherwise everybody is wrong.

No more like there is some truth in each bubble, not that there is a bubble that is 100% truth on all topics.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 18, 2021, 09:14:22 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 18, 2021, 06:43:26 AM
Correction: You know what the YouTubers have to say about it (The observations of confirmation bias stand).

You're dancing quite the tarantella to avoid examining what a ridiculous remark "MSM media is against medicare for all" is.

And, significantly, you do not offer any MSM examples in any defense. You just double down with "I heard it on YouTube, it's gotta be true," indifferent to the light this sheds on your critical faculties.

Well, they don't shout "M4A SUCKS!!" That would make them look silly. They are more subtle. One common tactic they use is bring advocates of medicare for all to the studio with people against it (paid to oppose it by the healthcare industry). Then they threat these parties equally (Gees, can't say who is right and who is wrong!). It looks like they are not opposing M4A, but in reality they spread distrust to these progressive agendas putting corporate propaganda and fact-based progressive ideas on the same line. It's like having a debate between flat-earthers and real scientists about whether Earth is flat or not. You can't treat both parties equally. You need to call out the other party is silly and not interested of real facts. Similarly MSM should call out the lobbyists and tell people they are not interested of providing people healthcare in a cost-effective way. Only the M4A-supporters are insterested of that.

Somehow "lefty" MSNBC was much more enthusiastic about Biden than Bernie. That tell everything about what they think.

Finding examples is surprisingly difficult and I am so sick and tired of all the cookie consent crap these site have.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 18, 2021, 09:17:20 AM
Quote from: DavidW on March 18, 2021, 09:11:15 AM
No more like there is some truth in each bubble, not that there is a bubble that is 100% truth on all topics.

On some issues that is true. Healthcare is an issue were this is clear were the truth is.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on March 18, 2021, 09:54:40 AM
Quote from: DavidW on March 18, 2021, 09:11:15 AM
No more like there is some truth in each bubble, not that there is a bubble that is 100% truth on all topics.
Watch out. This is what I've always been saying here and then I get labeled a "bothsideists." Good luck considering multiple viewpoints here.  :P
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on March 18, 2021, 03:42:18 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 18, 2021, 08:56:04 AM
I have been saying this for years here and half of the time I am told I am a victim of confirmation bias and I live inside the lefty Youtuber's bubble. The facts are inside someone's bubble. Someone's bubble contains the truth or otherwise everybody is wrong. I am especially surprised about the hostility from SimonNZ given the fact that the healthcare system in the New Zealand is nothing like in the US and much cheaper. Why SimonNZ defends the US healthcare system is so weird to me. Maybe he owns stocks of Big Pharma?  ::)

I have not once said anything about the US healthcare system on this thread.

The only thing I have said about healthcare has been to tell you that you know nothing about the pros and cons of the NZ system as it currently exists - probably as little as you know about the US system - and are not fit to compare it to anything.

This is the way your Youtubers argue: if you dont agree with me I can just go ahead and assume your reasons and act as though you've already stated them.

It would take a mountain of reading before I would consider myself ready to opine on a subject like that. And I know you haven't read so much as a page.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 18, 2021, 04:58:19 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on March 18, 2021, 03:42:18 PM
I have not once said anything about the US healthcare system on this thread.

Well, what I say about the US healthcare system doesn't seem to please you based on the unfriendly posts I get from you.

Quote from: SimonNZ on March 18, 2021, 03:42:18 PMThe only thing I have said about healthcare has been to tell you that you know nothing about the pros and cons of the NZ system as it currently exists - probably as little as you know about the US system - and are not fit to compare it to anything.

Yes, I don't know anything about the NZ system except that it costs about the same as the UK system, which is considered cost-effective. I do know about the  US system, because I have been following US politics for years now. Why would I write so much about it if I knew nothing?

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on March 18, 2021, 05:15:43 PM
No, you've been watching a bunch of superficial and simplistic Youtube amateur pundits for years so you've never gone beyond a superficial and simplistic understanding.

Pick up any overview of the subject published by a university press and realize just how very little you know, how massively complex the subject is and how much more you would need before you could even start to understand. At this stage you don't even have a sense of the landscape of whats out there in the scholarship and debate, or how to even begin on the path to the most introductory-level familiarity.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on March 18, 2021, 05:15:52 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 18, 2021, 04:58:19 PM
...........Why would I write so much about it if I knew nothing?

That's an excellent question, and one I have often wondered at. One of those little mysteries that life so often provides to give us some mind candy...  :)

8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 18, 2021, 05:16:48 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on March 18, 2021, 03:42:18 PM
It would take a mountain of reading before I would consider myself ready to opine on a subject like that. And I know you haven't read so much as a page.

Don't be silly. Elections would be pointless, because hardly anyone would know anything! People can get an overall picture of thing without becoming Nobel laureates. I am not talking about things that need really deep knowledge, because I don't have that, but anyone who has followed US politics just a little bit outside MSM know the huge problems of the US healtcare system and also what the solutions are.

If this was math this would go like this:

71 dB: Square root of 81 is 9.
SimonNZ: Go away. You don't read. You can't know that!
71 dB: Yes I can. I have an university degree in engineering. I can easily calculate the square root of 81.
SimonNZ: I don't believe you! You are not Terence Tao! Not even Michael Penn or Dr Peyam!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on March 18, 2021, 05:28:36 PM
No, it wouldn't go like that because you learned that from a professional teacher in the wider context of a mathematical education and its principles and with a sense of how much there was still left to learn, you didn't just take it on faith from some random person as a floating factoid.

I think I've said before that you're more like someone who says "I have learned that the square root of 81 is 9 which means I am now a mathematical expert who can speak with authority on any mathematical issue"
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 18, 2021, 05:30:03 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on March 18, 2021, 05:15:43 PM
No, you've been watching a bunch of superficial and simplistic Youtube amateur pundits for years so you've never gone beyond a superficial and simplistic understanding.

When I fact check these  "simplistic Youtube amateur pundits" I find out the experts AGREE WITH THEM!! That's the fucking idea! I get to know what experts say listening to these Youtubers. If I go to MSM, what experts way is twisted and smeared to serve the oligarchs.

Do your homework or shut up. If you are not interested of US healthcare then could you ignore what I say about it? I don't know why you think I only watch Youtubers. They are just easiest to link. I find TYT videos easily on Youtube while finding expert stuff is hard + all the consent crap. I am always like what the fuck why is it difficult to Google this stuff? Like if I read something 2 years ago I remember the main message/point but not the author or link etc so its hard. Sorry. FACT CHECK what I say and see yourself it is more or less correct! If I have some facts wrong I am happy to learn what the correct facts are because I am interested of the truth.

Quote from: SimonNZ on March 18, 2021, 05:15:43 PMPick up any overview of the subject published by a university press and realize just how very little you know, how massively complex the subject is and how much more you would need before you could even start to understand. At this stage you don't even have a sense of the landscape of whats out there in the scholarship and debate, or how to even begin on the path to the most introductory-level familiarity.

Details are complicated. I am talking about BIG picture. I am saying the US needs to go social democratic direction. How? That's details. There are options. I say medicare for all. How? Not saying that. Many options. UK way, France way... that's complex detail.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 18, 2021, 05:40:03 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on March 18, 2021, 05:28:36 PM
No, it wouldn't go like that because you learned that from a professional teacher in the wider context of a mathematical education and its principles and with a sense of how much there was still left to learn, you didn't just take it on faith from some random person as a floating factoid.

I think I've said before that you're more like someone who says "I have learned that the square root of 81 is 9 which means I am now a mathematical expert who can speak with authority on any mathematical issue"

What I say is limited to certain issues so don't twist this. Other people (lefties here) post the same stuff I do. I am not making ADVANCED claims on US politics. I am making claims anybody who follows stuff can know. If you want to do this on some super-academic level the be my guest but I am not doing that. I am not a professor of US politics. I am just a dude in Finland who followed US politics a lot for years.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on March 18, 2021, 06:12:13 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 18, 2021, 05:40:03 PM
I am just a dude in Finland
私はコーヒーを飲む
Living up the Finnish stereotypes!  :D  ;)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 18, 2021, 06:31:28 PM
Quote from: greg on March 18, 2021, 06:12:13 PM
Living up the Finnish stereotypes!  :D  ;)
Of course!   ☕️ 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on March 19, 2021, 12:48:25 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 18, 2021, 04:58:19 PM
I do know about the  US system, because I have been following US politics for years now. Why would I write so much about it if I knew nothing?

And many's the time you said you were putting an end to your Medicare / Bernie activism on a music group. And yet here we are again.

Personally I am really dying to know more about Finland and the Baltic states, which do not seem to have your interest.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 19, 2021, 05:00:16 AM
Quote from: Herman on March 19, 2021, 12:48:25 AM
And many's the time you said you were putting an end to your Medicare / Bernie activism on a music group. And yet here we are again.

Actually I am doing that. This recent activity has been defending myself and "the Youtubers."
Last year, especially before Bernie dropped out of the race there was a reason for "activism." American had the change to chance things, but then the oligarchs managed to stop Bernie and now chance has to be waited for years while the status quo manager is in the White House.

Quote from: Herman on March 19, 2021, 12:48:25 AMPersonally I am really dying to know more about Finland and the Baltic states, which do not seem to have your interest.

What do you want to know? Finland is number #1 in the World Happiness Report (https://worldhappiness.report) again:

1. Finland
2. Iceland
3. Denmark
4. Switzerland
5. Netherlands
6. Sweden
7. Germany
8. Norway
9. New Zealand
10. Austria

I do of course follow Finnish politics, althou it is boring compared to the US politics. Because we have so little corruption most of the time the politics is rational and it is about arguing small details. Thanks to social democratic ideology not only the richest people are served, but also regular people. Our problem is not corruption, but limited resources we have to use wisely. Unlike Norway, we can't just pump up oil and get rich selling it. We have to invest in development of high-tech solutions such as clean-tech and materials of the future for example.

We hear some stuff from Estonia (the corona situation over there has gotten sadly really bad).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on March 19, 2021, 06:01:17 AM
Hey did y'all see the exchange between Fauci and Rand Paul?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 19, 2021, 07:15:04 AM
Quote from: DavidW on March 19, 2021, 06:01:17 AM
Hey did y'all see the exchange between Fauci and Rand Paul?

Yes. Masks after vaccination is a nuanced issue.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 06:17:52 AM
This is an eye-opening video for Americans who still believe they have it better than people in other countries. Less than 13 minutes long.

David Cross: Why America Sucks at Everything

https://www.youtube.com/v/aNghg1Y-WIc
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on March 20, 2021, 08:00:40 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 06:17:52 AM
This is an eye-opening video for Americans who still believe they have it better than people in other countries.

You do know that he is a standup comedian right?  This is not like we're sitting down with a historian or an economist. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 20, 2021, 08:02:51 AM
(* chortle *)

And: Warnock called the wave of at least 250 Republican voter-suppression bills being put forward in 43 states "Jim Crow in new clothes."

McConnell's GOP is imposing and defending restrictions that serve to reduce and suppress minority voting — just as the segregationists of decades past did. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/mitch-mcconnell-is-running-scared/2021/03/19/573165b2-8826-11eb-82bc-e58213caa38e_story.html)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: steve ridgway on March 20, 2021, 08:05:57 AM
Strange as it might seem to GMG members, Finland has been again ranked the Happiest Country (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-56457295) in the world. :-\

Finland has been named the happiest place in the world for a fourth year running, in an annual UN-sponsored report.
The World Happiness Report saw Denmark in second place, then Switzerland, Iceland and the Netherlands.
New Zealand was again the only non-European nation in the top 10. The UK fell from 13th to 17th place.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 20, 2021, 08:10:28 AM
Quote from: steve ridgway on March 20, 2021, 08:05:57 AM
Strange as it might seem to GMG members, Finland has been again ranked the Happiest Country (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-56457295) in the world. :-\

Finland has been named the happiest place in the world for a fourth year running, in an annual UN-sponsored report.
The World Happiness Report saw Denmark in second place, then Switzerland, Iceland and the Netherlands.
New Zealand was again the only non-European nation in the top 10. The UK fell from 13th to 17th place.


Could the secret be, watching YouTube? 8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 08:36:12 AM
Quote from: steve ridgway on March 20, 2021, 08:05:57 AM
Strange as it might seem to GMG members, Finland has been again ranked the Happiest Country (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-56457295) in the world. :-\

Finland has been named the happiest place in the world for a fourth year running, in an annual UN-sponsored report.
The World Happiness Report saw Denmark in second place, then Switzerland, Iceland and the Netherlands.
New Zealand was again the only non-European nation in the top 10. The UK fell from 13th to 17th place.


Top Five: Finland, Denmark, Switzerland, Iceland, The Netherlands.

I don't know how they measure happiness but one thing I know for sure: the climate of all those countries (with the partial exception of Switzerland) would send me into deep depression. I relish sun, warmth and indian summers and I can't stand extended periods of rain, cloudy sky, cold and snow. I've lived in The Netherlands for two years, I know what I'm talking about --- at one moment it rained uninterruptedly for two weeks and I felt like packing my things right then and there and heading for Seville, Naples or Nice instantly. I didn't because I couldn't but honestly those were among the worst two weeks of my life, not even the Covid quarantine were that bad. ;D

Sorry, guys, my idea of happiness is located in Italy, Spain, Southern France or Greece --- excluding Romania, of course.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 09:35:19 AM
Quote from: steve ridgway on March 20, 2021, 08:05:57 AM
Strange as it might seem to GMG members, Finland has been again ranked the Happiest Country (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-56457295) in the world. :-\

Finland has been named the happiest place in the world for a fourth year running, in an annual UN-sponsored report.
The World Happiness Report saw Denmark in second place, then Switzerland, Iceland and the Netherlands.
New Zealand was again the only non-European nation in the top 10. The UK fell from 13th to 17th place.


The best way to understand why is to come to live in Finland to see how much good things our country has to offer so that even the cold weather, expensive alchohol and crazy difficult language are a far cry compared to all the good.  :)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 09:41:10 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 09:35:19 AM
cold weather, expensive alchohol and crazy difficult language

I have a big native talent for foreign languages so that wouln't be a problem for me. Cold weather and expensive alcohol, though --- thanks but no thanks. Give me sun, warmth, beer and wine --- and I'm happy.  :D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on March 20, 2021, 09:41:58 AM
Quote from: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 08:36:12 AM
Top Five: Finland, Denmark, Switzerland, Iceland, The Netherlands.

I don't know how they measure happiness but one thing I know for sure: the climate of all those countries (with the partial exception of Switzerland) would send me into deep depression. I relish sun, warmth and indian summers and I can't stand extended periods of rain, cloudy sky, cold and snow. I've lived in The Netherlands for two years, I know what I'm talking about --- at one moment it rained uninterruptedly for two weeks and I felt like packing my things right then and there and heading for Seville, Naples or Nice instantly. I didn't because I couldn't but honestly those were among the worst two weeks of my life, not even the Covid quarantine were that bad. ;D

Sorry, guys, my idea of happiness is located in Italy, Spain, Southern France or Greece --- excluding Romania, of course.
Yeah, it's like they don't take that into factor with their calculations.
I do have some friends that love the cold weather, but they probably are exceptions, considering most of humanity lives in warmer parts of the world. So it probably should factor as a negative.

Actually, the reason why I would stay here in Texas long term if I could is just because of the warmer weather. Iowa is a nice state, but the winters are just so miserable, half the year you can't even go outside. Nice that I was only there two years. Getting outside and running around, playing sports and such is good for your mental health. Or just not having to be in pain when you are outside.

Honestly don't know how the Scandinavians keep mentally healthy with that weather.  ???
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 09:49:09 AM
Quote from: greg on March 20, 2021, 09:41:58 AM
half the year you can't even go outside.

That would kill me.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 10:02:49 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 20, 2021, 08:10:28 AM
Could the secret be, watching YouTube? 8)

No. The secret is things such as:

- Almost no corruption => well functioning democracy
- Clean nature / air / water
- Well-functioning society
- Trust in the politicians and authorities
- Trust is other people
- High education level (tuition free higher education)
- Equality
- Safety
- Social democracy
- Wellfare safety nets
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 10:07:16 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 10:02:49 AM
- Almost no corruption => well functioning democracy
- Clean nature / air / water
- Well-functioning society
- Trust in the politicians and authorities
- Trust is other people
- High education level (tuition free higher education)
- Equality
- Safety
- Social democracy
- Wellfare safety nets

Well, it sounds too good to be true --- and even if it were true, if I have to pay for all that with half a year of rainy, snowy, cold and cloudy weather plus expensive beer and wine all year round, thanks but no thanks.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 10:25:20 AM
Quote from: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 08:36:12 AM
I don't know how they measure happiness but one thing I know for sure: the climate of all those countries (with the partial exception of Switzerland) would send me into deep depression. I relish sun, warmth and indian summers and I can't stand extended periods of rain, cloudy sky, cold and snow. I've lived in The Netherlands for two years, I know what I'm talking about --- at one moment it rained uninterruptedly for two weeks and I felt like packing my things right then and there and heading for Seville, Naples or Nice instantly. I didn't because I couldn't but honestly those were among the worst two weeks of my life, not even the Covid quarantine were that bad. ;D

Sorry, guys, my idea of happiness is located in Italy, Spain, Southern France or Greece --- excluding Romania, of course.

Yes, the darkness of Finnish winter would be hard for you coming from Romania for the first few years before you would get used to it, but there are ways to alleviate it: Eating vitamin D and use of bright lamps mimicking Sunlight. On the other hand you'd be overjoyed in the summertime when the Sun hardly drops below the horizon at all and there's some light even during the night. The coldness of Finnish winters might also be challenging for you, but on the other hand Finnish homes are well insulated and warm inside (typically +25°C / +77°F). Also, Finland has four REAL seasons (yes, even warm summer) and seeing the chance from one to another brings joy to life.

Yes, they probably have nicer weather in Spain than in Nordic countries, but how about other things? Life is not just weather. An Argentinian guy now living in Finland said it well: "If weather is the thing you are complaining about you are living in a damn good country."

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: steve ridgway on March 20, 2021, 10:38:07 AM
Four distinct seasons sounds good and I hardly drink alcohol nowadays but we do enjoy countryside walks with the dogs all year round - we've even had picnics on Christmas Day!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 10:38:26 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 10:25:20 AM
Life is not just weather.

Yes, but it's not just social-democracy either.  ;D

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 10:40:08 AM
Quote from: steve ridgway on March 20, 2021, 10:38:07 AM
Four distinct seasons sounds good

That was Romania during my childhood.

Nowadays there's an extended winter and an extended summer, with a month-worth of raining in between.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 10:40:13 AM
Quote from: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 10:07:16 AM
Well, it sounds too good to be true --- and even if it were true, if I have to pay for all that with half a year of rainy, snowy, cold and cloudy weather plus expensive beer and wine all year round, thanks but no thanks.

It is all true. That's why Finland and other Nordic countries kick ass when it comes to rankings of countries based on quality of living.

Finland isn't particularly rainy/cloudy country, but admittedly we do have shitty weather sometimes and Finns do complain about it. If weather is the only thing you care about Finland might not be the first choice, but if you look at all things Finland becomes really attractive.

Alcohol is expensive, I suppose MUCH MUCH more expensive than in Romania, but then again, there are other things in life than just beer. In Finland you get the best deals for mobile plans in the World. Very cheap + unlimited data. And it works even in the middle of nowhere.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 10:44:25 AM
Quote from: steve ridgway on March 20, 2021, 10:38:07 AM
Four distinct seasons sounds good and I hardly drink alcohol nowadays but we do enjoy countryside walks with the dogs all year round - we've even had picnics on Christmas Day!

Seasons in Finland look like this:
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 10:45:55 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 10:40:13 AM
Alcohol is expensive, I suppose MUCH MUCH more expensive than in Romania,

And it's not just the price, it's also the availability. In Romania, if I want ot buy alcohol at 3:45 AM I can*. Is it the same in Finland?  :)

*well, actually I could before the damn Covid.

Quote from: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 10:40:13 AM
but then again, there are other things in life than just beer.

Of course. There's also wine and whisky.  :P

QuoteIn Finland you get the best deals for mobile plans in the World. Very cheap + unlimited data. And it works even in the middle of nowhere.

I couldn't care less about that as this is what my phone looks like:

(https://s13emagst.akamaized.net/products/6022/6021774/images/res_f7eb764947d09b3a9971d9421f2efe27.jpg?width=450&height=450&hash=5EC396F76C19D9B60BAD8FFB2A61DBE5)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 10:50:43 AM
Quote from: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 10:38:26 AM
Yes, but it's not just social-democracy either.  ;D

Not entirely, but social-democracy has it's effects in many areas of life such as any other system (crony capitalism, socialism, communism, dictatorship etc.). When something works well in society, it helps making other things also functioning well.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 10:51:24 AM
Quote from: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 10:40:08 AM
That was Romania during my childhood.

Nowadays there's an extended winter and an extended summer, with a month-worth of raining in between.

Climate change?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 10:55:51 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 10:50:43 AM
Not entirely, but social-democracy has it's effects in many areas of life such as any other system (crony capitalism, socialism, communism, dictatorship etc.). When something works well in society, it helps making other things also functioning well.

I am not opposed to social-democracy (I actually think its basic ideas are good and sound). What I am opposed to is thinking that social-democracy can work everywhere just as smooth as it works in Finland simply by political fiat.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 10:58:12 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 10:51:24 AM
Climate change?

Yes, absolutely. I've never denied it because I've seen it developping under my own eyes. Now, whether it's human-induced or just cyclic, I',m not going to open this can of worms.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 10:58:50 AM
Quote from: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 10:45:55 AM
And it's not just the price, it's also the availability. In Romania, if I want ot buy alcohol at 3:45 AM I can*. Is it the same in Finland?  :)

*well, actually I could before the damn Covid.

You are right about this criticism. Alcohol in Finland is pricy and hard to get. Luckily I don't use alcohol myself so this doesn't concern me.

Quote from: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 10:45:55 AMOf course. There's also wine and whisky.  :P

Sure.  ;)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 11:02:19 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 10:58:50 AM
Alcohol in Finland is pricy and hard to get.

Not exactly my idea of happiness.  :P
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on March 20, 2021, 11:11:22 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 10:44:25 AM
Seasons in Finland look like this:

Nice.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 11:12:28 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 10:44:25 AM
Seasons in Finland look like this:

Once again, that was Romania during my childhood.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 11:13:05 AM
Quote from: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 10:55:51 AM
I am not opposed to social-democracy (I actually think its basic ideas are good and sound). What I am opposed to is thinking that social-democracy can work everywhere just as smooth as it works in Finland simply by political fiat.

Every country is different and needs it's own system. However, if a country is doing especially badly on some areas, it is wise to look at countries excelling on those things for hints how to do better.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 11:16:20 AM
Quote from: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 11:12:28 AM
Once again, that was Romania during my childhood.

That's interesting to hear considering where Romania is located.  $:)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 11:21:33 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 11:13:05 AM
Every country is different and needs it's own system. However, if a country is doing especially badly on some areas, it is wise to look at countries excelling on those things for hints how to do better.

Have you ever wondered why is it that social-democracy works perfectly well, smoothly and virtually unopposed in Scandinavia only? I have, and I have come to a conclusion in this respect but I'm not going to open this can of worms. I'd better stick to beer and wine.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 11:28:05 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 11:16:20 AM
That's interesting to hear considering where Romania is located.  $:)

Well, Romania's climate is --- or rather was --- temperate-continental* . At least this is what I was taught in midlel and high school, and this is what I personally witnessed during the same period. The things began to change gradually after 2000 AD and drastically after 2010 AD.

* Bucharest is located at slightly less than 45 degree Northern latitude.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 11:34:28 AM
Quote from: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 11:02:19 AM
Not exactly my idea of happiness.  :P

Sorry about that. Maybe you shouldn't come here then? I'm telling honestly what my country is like, the good and the bad. The things foreigners living in Finland complain about are:

- Dark cold winters
- Things can be expensive (especially if you come from a country where stuff is cheap)
- Restrictions of buying alcohol
- Crazy difficult language
- People seem cold at first before you get to know them (Finns are rather introverted and don't do smalltalk so Americans feel strange here)

That's about it. Pretty much everything else about Finland gets praised by foreigners, because Finland is a well-functioning country.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 20, 2021, 11:36:49 AM
I guess we need a Finland: the happiest country thread.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 20, 2021, 11:38:07 AM
Russian Support for Trump's Re‑Election Detailed in Intel Report (https://thebulwark.com/russian-support-for-trumps-reelection-detailed-in-intel-report/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 11:42:00 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 11:34:28 AM
Sorry about that. Maybe you shouldn't come here then?

The last thing I have in my mind is going to Finland.  ;D

Don't get me wrong, I firmly believe it's an admirable country in so many respects. It's just not the right country for me personally. That said, I'd very much like to visit it.

QuoteThe things foreigners living in Finland complain about are:
- Dark cold winters
- Things can be expensive (especially if you come from a country where stuff is cheap)
- Restrictions of buying alcohol

- Crazy difficult language
- People seem cold at first before you get to know them (Finns are rather introverted and don't do smalltalk so Americans feel strange here)

As I said, I could put up with Finnish as I'm natively endowed for learning foreign languages. All others are big turn-offs for me.

But then again, people and countries being different is alright with me. If everyone everywhere would be the same the world would be unbearablingly boring.

If you ever want to visit Romania, just let me know. You are most welcome and I'll do my best to convert you to our way of life.  :P (Valid for all GMGers actually)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 11:50:50 AM
Quote from: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 11:21:33 AM
Have you ever wondered why is it that social-democracy works perfectly well, smoothly and virtually unopposed in Scandinavia only? I have, and I have come to a conclusion in this respect but I'm not going to open this can of worms. I'd better stick to beer and wine.

This is an interesting question. What we must remember is no country has a "pure something" system. Cuba is not 100 % pure communism. About 20 % of their economy is capitalistic. The US is not 100 % capitalistic. The US has "socialistic" services such the the fire department, because privatized fire department doesn't work (yes, it was tried in the US). Countries that are very far from Scandinavia can have political structures similar to Nordic countries. I believe for example Latin American countries such as Chile have tried to become "social-democratic" in the past, but the US has intervened and put a right-wing puppet dictator in power because the US wants political and financial power in these countries just like in the middle East.

Enjoy your (cheap) beer and wine, but watch out your liver.  ;)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 12:00:00 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 11:50:50 AM
Enjoy your (cheap) beer and wine, but watch out your liver.  ;)

Well now, please, don't you ever think I'm any match for Sibelius.  ;D




Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 12:04:44 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 20, 2021, 11:36:49 AM
I guess we need a Finland: the happiest country thread.

BTW, Finland also ranks #1 on The Global Food Security Index (https://foodsecurityindex.eiu.com).   8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 12:06:38 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 12:04:44 PM
BTW, Finland also ranks #1 on The Global Food Security Index (https://foodsecurityindex.eiu.com).   8)

Finland is the greatest country in the world where I wouldn't want to live.  :laugh:
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on March 20, 2021, 12:34:39 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 20, 2021, 11:36:49 AM
I guess we need a Finland: the happiest country thread.

The face of happiness.

(https://usuo.org/app/uploads/sites/2/2019/01/Sibelius2.jpg)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on March 20, 2021, 12:42:22 PM
Quote from: DavidW on March 20, 2021, 12:34:39 PM
The face of happiness.

(https://usuo.org/app/uploads/sites/2/2019/01/Sibelius2.jpg)

Though lesser known, there's also this, uber-happy one, however:
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 12:43:14 PM
Quote from: DavidW on March 20, 2021, 12:34:39 PM
The face of happiness.

(https://usuo.org/app/uploads/sites/2/2019/01/Sibelius2.jpg)

Hah!




Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 12:48:07 PM
Quote from: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 11:42:00 AM
The last thing I have in my mind is going to Finland.  ;D

Don't get me wrong, I firmly believe it's an admirable country in so many respects. It's just not the right country for me personally. That said, I'd very much like to visit it.

Well, you are welcome if you desided to visit in the distant corona-free times. Summer (July) is the best time to come here weather-wise.

Quote from: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 11:42:00 AMAs I said, I could put up with Finnish as I'm natively endowed for learning foreign languages. All others are big turn-offs for me.

Just be warned: Learning Finnish "fast" is not a thing. No matter what linguistic genius you are. Many foreigners working and living in Finland never really learn the language beyond the basics and just use English at work. Determined people willing to work for it learn it with time. One person who had had Finnish courses to learn Finnish told the first thing their Finnish teacher said to them in the beginning of the first lecture was "Why are you doing this to youself?"  ;D

Learn Finnish for 2 Months - HOW HARD IS IT?

https://www.youtube.com/v/19kFiiQLYvI

Quote from: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 11:42:00 AMBut then again, people and countries being different is alright with me. If everyone everywhere would be the same the world would be unbearablingly boring.

Yeah, and you can have a good life almost anywhere and not everybody inside a given country are equally happy/unhappy.

Quote from: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 11:42:00 AMIf you ever want to visit Romania, just let me know. You are most welcome and I'll do my best to convert you to our way of life.  :P (Valid for all GMGers actually)

I almost never travel, but it's good to know I'd be welcome if I someday enter Romania, thanks!  ;)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 12:55:27 PM
Now that you started me, here are my top three faces of happiness, in no particular order.

(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3874/15213175599_d13fe70992.jpg)(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/23/87/63/2387631dcf0e6d4cfd6eeb04c4505cb4.jpg) (http://cimro.ro/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/dinu-lipatti.jpg)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 12:59:34 PM
Quote from: DavidW on March 20, 2021, 12:34:39 PM
The face of happiness.

(https://usuo.org/app/uploads/sites/2/2019/01/Sibelius2.jpg)

Most of the time Finns DO look like that because our culture is introverted, but when Finns win the World Championship in Ice-Hockey Finns look completely different!

ICE HOCKEY CHAMPIONSHIP TO FINLAND 2019 (WTF: Welcome To Finland #14)

https://www.youtube.com/v/24pySkBn7gM
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 01:00:55 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 12:48:07 PM
Well, you are welcome if you desided to visit in the distant corona-free times. Summer (July) is the best time to come here weather-wise.

Just be warned: Learning Finnish "fast" is not a thing. No matter what linguistic genius you are. Many foreigners working and living in Finland never really learn the language beyond the basics and just use English at work. Determined people willing to work for it learn it with time. One person who had had Finnish courses to learn Finnish told the first thing their Finnish teacher said to them in the beginning of the first lecture was "Why are you doing this to youself?"  ;D

Learn Finnish for 2 Months - HOW HARD IS IT?

https://www.youtube.com/v/19kFiiQLYvI

Yeah, and you can have a good life almost anywhere and not everybody inside a given country are equally happy/unhappy.

I almost never travel, but it's good to know I'd be welcome if I someday enter Romania, thanks!  ;)

All points duly noted, Poju. Thanks.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 01:02:52 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 12:59:34 PM
Most of the time Finns DO look like that because our culture is introverted

If you ask me, it's got something to do with the climate.  ;)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on March 20, 2021, 01:18:29 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 12:48:07 PM
...
Just be warned: Learning Finnish "fast" is not a thing. No matter what linguistic genius you are. Many foreigners working and living in Finland never really learn the language beyond the basics and just use English at work. Determined people willing to work for it learn it with time. One person who had had Finnish courses to learn Finnish told the first thing their Finnish teacher said to them in the beginning of the first lecture was "Why are you doing this to youself?"  ;D

Learn Finnish for 2 Months - HOW HARD IS IT?

https://www.youtube.com/v/19kFiiQLYvI
...

That's hilarious, but based on all I've heard Finnish is painfully difficult to learn.  Finnish is a Uralic, not Indo-European, language, but then I'm told that Lithuanian and Russian are also extremely difficult though Slavic Indo-European.

... At my age it would be impossible to learn any of them.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 01:20:03 PM
Quote from: Fëanor on March 20, 2021, 01:18:29 PM
... At my age

Oh, come on! You're not 180, are you?  ;D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: ritter on March 20, 2021, 01:22:05 PM
It's a sign of normality, and a great relief, that nowadays US politics seem to be have reverted to being so boring (which should be read as a compliment in this context), so as to turn the thread dedicated it into one in which the wonders of Finland have been discussed for the past  three pages. Hallelujah!  :)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 01:23:35 PM
Quote from: ritter on March 20, 2021, 01:22:05 PM
It's a sign of normality, and a great relief, that nowadays US politic seems to be have reverted to being so boring (which should be read as a compliment in this context), so as to turn the thread dedicated it into one in which the wonders of Finland have been discussed for the past  three pages. Hallelujah!  :)

Emmenez-moi au bout de la terre
Emmenez-moi au pays des merveilles
Il me semble que la misère
Serait moins pénible au soleil!


;)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: ritter on March 20, 2021, 01:26:11 PM
"Kennst du das Land, wo die Zitronen blühn,
Im dunkeln Laub die Goldorangen glühn,
Ein sanfter Wind vom blauen Himmel weht,
Die Myrte still und hoch der Lorbeer steht?
Kennst du es wohl? Dahin!
Dahin möcht' ich mit dir,
O mein Geliebter, ziehn
".

Good evening Andrei, Poju and all...

Quote from: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 01:23:35 PM
....
Il me semble que la misère
Serait moins pénible au soleil!


;)
That'a a great (and IMO) very true quote. I always say it to the German bosses of the company I work for... ;D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 01:30:27 PM
Quote from: ritter on March 20, 2021, 01:26:11 PM
"Kennst du das Land, wo die Zitronen blühn,
Im dunkeln Laub die Goldorangen glühn,
Ein sanfter Wind vom blauen Himmel weht,
Die Myrte still und hoch der Lorbeer steht?
Kennst du es wohl? Dahin!
Dahin möcht' ich mit dir,
O mein Geliebter, ziehn
".

Dahin! Dahin!
Möcht' ich mit dir, o mein Geliebter, ziehn.


Quote
Good evening Andrei, Poju and all...

Bona tarda amic meu!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 01:35:33 PM
Quote from: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 01:00:55 PM
All points duly noted, Poju. Thanks.

You're welcome.

Quote from: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 01:02:52 PM
If you ask me, it's got something to do with the climate.  ;)

Cold climate probably explains at least some of it. Warm countries tend to be extrovert.

Japanese people are similarly "quiet" and reserved as Finns. Japanese people living in Finland tell they "feel at home" here because of this.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 01:36:44 PM
QuoteThat's a great (and IMO) very true quote.

Of course it is.

QuoteI always say it to the German bosses of the company I work for... ;D

Next time tell them this:

Die Gedanken sind frei, wer kann sie erraten?
Sei fliehen vorbei wie nächtliche Schatten
Kein Mensch kann sie Wissen, kein Jäger erschiessen
Es bleibet dabei: die Gedanken sind frei...

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 04:19:13 PM
Quote from: DavidW on March 20, 2021, 08:00:40 AM
You do know that he is a standup comedian right?  This is not like we're sitting down with a historian or an economist.

I don't see the problem here. Are you saying standup comedians can't understand what historians and economists say about society?

As far as I know one needs to be witty and observant to become a good standup comedian. So, being one might actually help in noticing things around. Also, the person presenting videos are chosen based on their ability of perform and standup comedian are entertaining performers. We don't know who has done the research/writing for the video. Could have been a historian or an economist. Or the standup comedian himself...

My point is this attempt of discrediting the video I posted is not only unnecessory, but also silly as hell.  :P
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 20, 2021, 06:21:50 PM
Quote from: ritter on March 20, 2021, 01:22:05 PM
It's a sign of normality, and a great relief, that nowadays US politics seem to be have reverted to being so boring (which should be read as a compliment in this context), so as to turn the thread dedicated it into one in which the wonders of Finland have been discussed for the past  three pages. Hallelujah!  :)

Thanks for finding the upside to this thread becoming a Poju-fest.  :P

wake me when we're talking US Politics again.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on March 20, 2021, 06:54:38 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 11:34:28 AM
- People seem cold at first before you get to know them (Finns are rather introverted and don't do smalltalk so Americans feel strange here)
Basically polite but quiet and emotionally unavailable to strangers, right?

With that aspect, I'd fit right in. I feel stranger here in the US tbh, we have many different cultures/subcultures here but hardly any of it resonates with me.

Japan is a little closer in the fact that it is also a country of introverts, but it also shares the same problem of the US, I don't know what to call it, toxic positivity or something, maybe? Where everything is good, all the time, and people can't express their true feelings if they aren't feeling good, or don't like something, etc....

How is Finland in that regard? Seems much of northern Europe is more real based on what I've heard (especially England).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 07:05:29 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 20, 2021, 06:21:50 PM
wake me when we're talking US Politics again.

Real Americans don't want to learn anything outside the US, right? When the facts say the US sucks at almost everything real Americans put their fingers in the ears and sing "LA LA LA LA I don't hear you LA LA LA..."

Maybe we should talk about the things in which the US is REALLY good at so Americans here don't feel so bad? Here is one: Wrestling! The US is unbelievable good at that, the best entertainment in the World! Hulk Hogan, The Undertaker, Stone Cold Steve Austin and about half a million other legendary entertainers! I am not kidding, it is something I really admire about the US.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on March 20, 2021, 07:35:53 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 04:19:13 PM
Are you saying standup comedians can't understand what historians and economists say about society?

Yes I am.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on March 20, 2021, 07:46:42 PM
Quote from: DavidW on March 20, 2021, 07:35:53 PM
Yes I am.

The Gravel Institute videos are meant as a counter to the moronic and risible Prague U videos.  In that regard they do a good job, though anyone with a few neurons left firing could probably debunk a PU video handily.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on March 20, 2021, 07:49:39 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 07:05:29 PM
Real Americans don't want to learn anything outside the US, right? When the facts say the US sucks at almost everything real Americans put their fingers in the ears and sing "LA LA LA LA I don't hear you LA LA LA..."

Maybe we should talk about the things in which the US is REALLY good at so Americans here don't feel so bad? Here is one: Wrestling! The US is unbelievable good at that, the best entertainment in the World! Hulk Hogan, The Undertaker, Stone Cold Steve Austin and about half a million other legendary entertainers! I am not kidding, it is something I really admire about the US.

ffs...I strongly encourage you to remove and prohibit everything of American origin from your life.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 07:50:56 PM
Quote from: greg on March 20, 2021, 06:54:38 PM
Basically polite but quiet and emotionally unavailable to strangers, right?

Pretty much. Emotionally unavailable to strangers, because we have "minding my own business" mentality, but IF a stranger asks for help, help will be given in a friendly manner! 0:)

Quote from: greg on March 20, 2021, 06:54:38 PMWith that aspect, I'd fit right in. I feel stranger here in the US tbh, we have many different cultures/subcultures here but hardly any of it resonates with me.

Sorry to hear that. So, you find those subcultures too extrovert to your taste?

Quote from: greg on March 20, 2021, 06:54:38 PMJapan is a little closer in the fact that it is also a country of introverts, but it also shares the same problem of the US, I don't know what to call it, toxic positivity or something, maybe? Where everything is good, all the time, and people can't express their true feelings if they aren't feeling good, or don't like something, etc....

How is Finland in that regard? Seems much of northern Europe is more real based on what I've heard (especially England).

Japanese culture has the concepts of 本絵 (Honne, real opinions) ja 建前 (Tatemae, white lies) which makes it difficult for people from other cultures to know what Japanese people really think. Perhaps this is what makes it look "toxic" to you? In Finnish culture people tend to say what they think quite directly, so in general Finns say what they mean*. You might have seen this from the style I write here.  ;D When a Finn tells you to meet him/her at 2:00 pm it means 2:00 pm, not 2:15 pm. If you arrive 15 minutes late it is considered wasting 15 minutes of the other people's time. If you are traveling toward the place of meeting and 1:50 pm you realize because of Force Majeure you will be late you can call to the other person and inform him/her you will be about 15 minutes late. A few minutes late is ok, because we are not as punctual as Japanese people, but especially for people coming from African countries things look VERY punctual here.

* In American smalltalk culture people ask each other "How are you?", but it doesn't often mean they are genuinely interested. In Finnish culture we simply don't do the smalltalk and don't even ask. It's just two ways of not being interested. Both ways work, because people in that culture get used to how it is, but when an American comes Finland, or a Finn goes to the US strong culture shocks are warranted.  ;D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 07:56:42 PM
Quote from: DavidW on March 20, 2021, 07:35:53 PM
Yes I am.

Well man you should re-think your assumptions...

Quote from: Daverz on March 20, 2021, 07:46:42 PM
The Gravel Institute videos are meant as a counter to the moronic and risible Prague U videos.  In that regard they do a good job, though anyone with a few neurons left firing could probably debunk a PU video handily.

That is true.  :P
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on March 20, 2021, 08:43:22 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 07:50:56 PM
Pretty much. Emotionally unavailable to strangers, because we have "minding my own business" mentality, but IF a stranger asks for help, help will be given in a friendly manner! 0:)
Same.


Quote from: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 07:50:56 PM
Sorry to hear that. So, you find those subcultures too extrovert to your taste?
Yes. Very.


Quote from: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 07:50:56 PM
* In American smalltalk culture people ask each other "How are you?", but it doesn't often mean they are genuinely interested. In Finnish culture we simply don't do the smalltalk and don't even ask.
Nice.
yeah...  and you always have to answer "good," why does the English speaking world do that? If you are honestly not good, it's awkward to kill the vibe by saying so unless you are talking to someone really close to you.



Quote from: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 07:50:56 PM
Perhaps this is what makes it look "toxic" to you?
Actually the toxicity is more on the US side, rather than the Japanese side. Here it's usually looked down on if you aren't some sort of bubbly or charismatic extrovert. And people will tell you to smile or sometimes make fun of you if don't, idk, maybe those where just the specific environments I was in. The US is a huge country, can't really speak for all of it. But it does have this sort of reputation.

The only toxicity that might be going on in the Japanese side is the expectations of employees. It just feels like something similar is going on with retail workers, similar to the American "customer is always right" toxic positivity nonsense. Probably a similar thing with different causes, tying in together with their work culture/business in general, though. Like, you'll see on average Japanese employees being super friendly and animated, but you know they don't feel that way deep down inside. Take the next train and see half of the passengers look like they are about to die from fatigue (not only me observing that, my mom also observed that separately).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on March 21, 2021, 04:31:59 AM
Quote from: Florestan on March 20, 2021, 01:20:03 PM
Oh, come on! You're not 180, are you?  ;D

Close enough.  :(
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on March 21, 2021, 07:18:14 AM
https://www.yahoo.com/news/idaho-legislature-shuts-down-due-145259066.html

KEITH RIDLER
Fri, March 19, 2021, 10:52 AM
BOISE, Idaho (AP) — The Idaho Legislature voted Friday to shut down for several weeks due to an outbreak of COVID-19.

Lawmakers in the House and Senate made the move to recess until April 6 with significant unfinished business, including setting budgets and pushing through a huge income tax cut.

At least six of the 70 House members tested positive for the illness in the last week, and there are fears a highly contagious variant of COVID-19 is in the Statehouse.

"The House has had several positive tests, so it is probably prudent that the House take a step back for a couple weeks until things calm down and it's not hot around here for COVID," House Majority Leader Mike Moyle said before the votes.

Five of those who tested positive are Republicans and one is Democrat. Another Republican lawmaker is self-isolating. The chamber has a super-majority of 58 Republicans, most of whom rarely or never wear masks. All the Democratic lawmakers typically wear masks.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 21, 2021, 08:30:56 AM
Easy to tell who the jerkweeds are, I guess....
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on March 21, 2021, 10:34:01 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 07:05:29 PM
Real Americans don't want to learn anything outside the US, right? When the facts say the US sucks at almost everything real Americans put their fingers in the ears and sing "LA LA LA LA I don't hear you LA LA LA..."

Maybe we should talk about the things in which the US is REALLY good at so Americans here don't feel so bad? Here is one: Wrestling! The US is unbelievable good at that, the best entertainment in the World! Hulk Hogan, The Undertaker, Stone Cold Steve Austin and about half a million other legendary entertainers! I am not kidding, it is something I really admire about the US.

BAM !! Says a lot when one says that one admires the USA most for pro wrestling.

We Canadians probably see and interact with ordinary Americans more than anybody else.  The ordinary Americans assumes US superiority in pretty much everything, "American exceptionalism".  Some of us Canucks actually agree; most just sigh and put up with it.  Personally I believed the USA was basically democratic and Americans were sensible on balance:  then Donald Trump was elected.

Very largely Trump was elected because because the USA is very limited & flawed democracy -- which shouldn't be surprising because that is what the so-called "Founding Fathers" intended.

A major flaw is the extent to which the states not only control their own Constitutional purviews but also effectively dictate the Federal agenda.  That means in turn that the country is controlled by a rural, small town, and small state minority.  The mechanisms for state control over the Federal government are principally:
Another important anti-democratic aspect of the US system include are Federal election laws that:
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 21, 2021, 10:43:23 AM
Quote from: greg on March 20, 2021, 08:43:22 PM
Actually the toxicity is more on the US side, rather than the Japanese side. Here it's usually looked down on if you aren't some sort of bubbly or charismatic extrovert. And people will tell you to smile or sometimes make fun of you if don't, idk, maybe those where just the specific environments I was in. The US is a huge country, can't really speak for all of it. But it does have this sort of reputation.

The only toxicity that might be going on in the Japanese side is the expectations of employees. It just feels like something similar is going on with retail workers, similar to the American "customer is always right" toxic positivity nonsense. Probably a similar thing with different causes, tying in together with their work culture/business in general, though. Like, you'll see on average Japanese employees being super friendly and animated, but you know they don't feel that way deep down inside. Take the next train and see half of the passengers look like they are about to die from fatigue (not only me observing that, my mom also observed that separately).

Yes, the US does have that kind of reputation.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 21, 2021, 11:12:28 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on March 21, 2021, 10:34:01 AM
BAM !! Says a lot when one says that one admires the USA most for pro wrestling.

Well, not perhaps the most, but I mentioned it as one example. It doesn't matter what we think about wrestling personally, the truth is all other countries combined can't hold the candle to the US on this. However, there are also many other things I admire about the US and I used to admire the US overall in the past much more, but sadly I have learned so much negative stuff and apart from the strong areas (often related to popular culture and entertainment) the US is a failed state, an empire of intellectual and moral decline.

Quote from: Fëanor on March 21, 2021, 10:34:01 AMWe Canadians probably see and interact with ordinary Americans more than anybody else.  The ordinary Americans assumes US superiority in pretty much everything, "American exceptionalism".  Some of us Canucks actually agree; most just sigh and put up with it.  Personally I believed the USA was basically democratic and Americans were sensible on balance:  then Donald Trump was elected.

Very largely Trump was elected because because the USA is very limited & flawed democracy -- which shouldn't be surprising because that is what the so-called "Founding Fathers" intended.

A major flaw is the extent to which the states not only control their own Constitutional purviews but also effectively dictate the Federal agenda.  That means in turn that the country is controlled by a rural, small town, and small state minority.  The mechanisms for state control over the Federal government are principally:

  • Each state gets two Senators.  So Wyoming with about 528,000 people gets the same votes are California with 39,368,00
  • The non-rep-by-pop Senate can veto US cabinet, ambassadorial, and, importantly, Supreme Court nominees
  • The states control Federal (a) district definitions, (b) voting lists, and (c) election procedures.  Furthermore, in most states partisan committees control these things.  Results include gerrymandering of districts and voter suppression
  • The Electoral College, which abstracts the voters from Presidential results, is regulated by state legislatures;  one result is that the "winner takes all" in all but 2 states -- this is the specific mechanism whereby Trump got elected POTUS in 2016 despite loosing the popular vote to Clinton.
Another important anti-democratic aspect of the US system include are Federal election laws that:

  • Render ineffectual candidate and party election spending limits
  • Allow covert election spending by corporations and other non-humans.

Good analyse of the democratic process in the US. What I would add is blatant corruption and the fact that bribing politicians is legal, which is pretty insane in a system expected (?) to be democratic.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on March 21, 2021, 12:25:12 PM
If all that's left for this thread to do is provide a stage for 71s miseducation then it may as well be closed

Imo.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 21, 2021, 01:07:48 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on March 21, 2021, 12:25:12 PM
If all that's left for this thread to do is provide a stage for 71s miseducation then it may as well be closed

Imo.

What the hell is your problem Simon? Maybe you have read every book in the World and you feel you know everything, but that doesn't mean other people don't have opinions or even knowledge about some things.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 21, 2021, 02:22:25 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on March 21, 2021, 12:25:12 PM
If all that's left for this thread to do is provide a stage for 71s miseducation then it may as well be closed

Imo.
+ 1
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on March 21, 2021, 03:45:55 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 21, 2021, 02:22:25 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on March 21, 2021, 12:25:12 PM
If all that's left for this thread to do is provide a stage for 71s miseducation then it may as well be closed

Imo.

+ 1

Pathetic.  While I don't agree with 71db in every detail about the USA, his insights are acute overall.

Instead of just stomping off in snit, why not try to refute is points with valid facts and argument?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 21, 2021, 03:58:55 PM
Quote from: Fëanor on March 21, 2021, 03:45:55 PM
Pathetic.  While I don't agree with 71db in every detail about the USA, his insights are acute overall.

Instead of just stomping off in snit, why not try to refute is points with valid facts and argument?

Thank you! Yes, bring it on if you disagree.  0:)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on March 21, 2021, 04:16:30 PM
Quote from: Fëanor on March 21, 2021, 03:45:55 PM
+ 1


Pathetic.  While I don't agree with 71db in every detail about the USA, his insights are acute overall.

Instead of just stomping off in snit, why not try to refute is points with valid facts and argument?

Oh good lord. Is this insightful and acute:

Quote from: 71 dB on March 20, 2021, 07:05:29 PM
Real Americans don't want to learn anything outside the US, right? When the facts say the US sucks at almost everything real Americans put their fingers in the ears and sing "LA LA LA LA I don't hear you LA LA LA..."

Maybe we should talk about the things in which the US is REALLY good at so Americans here don't feel so bad? Here is one: Wrestling! The US is unbelievable good at that, the best entertainment in the World! Hulk Hogan, The Undertaker, Stone Cold Steve Austin and about half a million other legendary entertainers! I am not kidding, it is something I really admire about the US.

And that's a milder example.

Any attempt to discuss with 71 and HE gets in a snit, calls us all brainwashed by the usual string of buzzword villains then gets in an even bigger snit that we don't accept that as he has watched a bunch of Youtube we should accept his more learned judgement.

EVERY attempt to present a position contrary to his own is taken as an affront, not as a chance to consider alternate points of view. Refuting his points with valid facts and argument has been attempted by a variety of people with a variety of beliefs. He lumps them all together as deluded fools.

I can only assume you haven't been reading him for very long. Some of us have had four long years of this. Four years of his obstinately doing exactly the LALALALA he claims of others. And now he's apparently happy to do it as a solo act. Pathetic.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 21, 2021, 06:11:20 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on March 21, 2021, 04:16:30 PM
Oh good lord. Is this insightful and acute:

And that's a milder example.

Milder in the way that it wasn't supposed to be "insightful and acute", but a response to Karl Henning's:

"wake me when we're talking US Politics again."

Not my best moment, but I was feeling frustrated and tired.

Quote from: SimonNZ on March 21, 2021, 04:16:30 PMAny attempt to discuss with 71 and HE gets in a snit, calls us all brainwashed by the usual string of buzzword villains then gets in an even bigger snit that we don't accept that as he has watched a bunch of Youtube we should accept his more learned judgement.

EVERY attempt to present a position contrary to his own is taken as an affront, not as a chance to consider alternate points of view. Refuting his points with valid facts and argument has been attempted by a variety of people with a variety of beliefs. He lumps them all together as deluded fools.

I can only assume you haven't been reading him for very long. Some of us have had four long years of this. Four years of his obstinately doing exactly the LALALALA he claims of others. And now he's apparently happy to do it as a solo act. Pathetic.

Just wow!  :o I know you are on the other side of the planet, but I never expected what I write look this "upside down" to what my intention is. I try to act as the voice of reason here. I suppose I just have to become better at this...  :-X
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on March 21, 2021, 07:41:26 PM
Quote from: Fëanor on March 21, 2021, 03:45:55 PM
Instead of just stomping off in snit, why not try to refute is points with valid facts and argument?
Lol. Good luck with that.


Quote from: SimonNZ on March 21, 2021, 04:16:30 PM
EVERY attempt to present a position contrary to his own is taken as an affront, not as a chance to consider alternate points of view. Refuting his points with valid facts and argument has been attempted by a variety of people with a variety of beliefs. He lumps them all together as deluded fools.
Taken out of context, I would have thought you were talking about certain other posters here.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on March 22, 2021, 02:51:41 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on March 21, 2021, 03:45:55 PM
+ 1


Pathetic.  While I don't agree with 71db in every detail about the USA, his insights are acute overall.

Instead of just stomping off in snit, why not try to refute is points with valid facts and argument?

There is no obligation whatsoever to discuss 71dB. You can just discuss your own ideas on this topic and ignore the, indeed, pretty predictable Finnish input.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 22, 2021, 02:57:48 AM
This thread has been more about feelings than facts: Instead of how much money Medicare for All would save*, we are having a fight based on our feelings about what are reliable sources of information. I feel (some, certainly not all!) Youtubers provide reliable information. Others here feel Washington Post or books provide it. For me Youtube is the easiest way to information on this front. The real problem with Youtube is their algorithms and the way it threads different kind of Youtubers. There are huge problems with the platform, but still we can get reliable information from there if we watch good Youtubers. Books are slow. Something happens today. The books writing about it comes out in 2023 or so. Writers have agendas too. It's not like the information in books is magically better than elsewhere. Wherever the information comes from we should analyse it critically.

It is impossible to be bias-free. Bias is just the coordinate point of your opinions in opinion space. If you have any opinions, you have a bias. Some opinions are factually better than other opinion meaning they have better bias. Reliable sources of information make it clear what their bias is. You know where they come from and you can process what they say. Sources trying to hide their bias are dangerous. Wearing expensive suit doesn't make one reliable (often the other way around!). Having an university degree doesn't automatically makes someone reliable. Anyone can give good or bad information. Analysing it critically is the key.

* Different studies have different numbers:
https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/healthcare/484301-22-studies-agree-medicare-for-all-saves-money
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on March 22, 2021, 04:05:08 AM
Quote from: Herman on March 22, 2021, 02:51:41 AM
There is no obligation whatsoever to discuss 71dB. You can just discuss your own ideas on this topic and ignore the, indeed, pretty predictable Finnish input.

That would seem to be the simplest solution:  if you feel the 71dB or anyone can't be reasoned with, then don't try.

I'm not a fan of closing threads much less of banning people unless they engage in major personal abuse.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 22, 2021, 05:01:54 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on March 22, 2021, 04:05:08 AM
That would seem to be the simplest solution:  if you feel the 71dB or anyone can't be reasoned with, then don't try.

I'm not a fan of closing threads much less of banning people unless they engage in major personal abuse.

I don't think my opinions are unreasonable and have to be reasoned with. What I say holds water when fact-checked.
Maybe that's why people here feel I can't be reasoned with?
If you are trying to convince me 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 is wrong because a Youtuber said so you will fail.

I did call people brainwashed in the past, but I have tried to cut it out. I'm sorry.

We all are a bit blind to things in our own country, the good and the bad. Listening to foreigners can give a lot of insight, because foreigners notice things we take for granted ourselves. It is not wise to dismiss the opinion of foreigners just because they are foreigners.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: André on March 22, 2021, 05:35:05 AM
Poju, believe it or not, I agree with a lot of your opinions, including medicare for all. But the way you express them and denigrate the unconvinced or opponents like Moses coming down from the mountain or Jesus chasing the merchants from the temple, irritates people no end - including me. You MUST find a better way to argue your points. And stop hammering the same nail day after f...ng day. It just makes people want to bash you. If you can't convince someone with arguments, just accept it and stop being so frustrated (and showing it). Your behaviour is the very negation of the image we can have of someone living in the 'happiest country in the world'...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 22, 2021, 05:55:29 AM
If that's what Finns mean by "happiness," they can keep it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 22, 2021, 06:59:30 AM
Quote from: André on March 22, 2021, 05:35:05 AM
Poju, believe it or not, I agree with a lot of your opinions, including medicare for all. But the way you express them and denigrate the unconvinced or opponents like Moses coming down from the mountain or Jesus chasing the merchants from the temple, irritates people no end - including me. You MUST find a better way to argue your points. And stop hammering the same nail day after f...ng day. It just makes people want to bash you. If you can't convince someone with arguments, just accept it and stop being so frustrated (and showing it). Your behaviour is the very negation of the image we can have of someone living in the 'happiest country in the world'...

I totally accept the criticism concerning the style I express my opinions and there is room for improvement on that front. Life happens and I got too obsessed of US politics because of Trump, a person who really broke people's brains...  :P I'll try to change my style to be less irritating to others.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 22, 2021, 07:04:40 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 22, 2021, 05:55:29 AM
If that's what Finns mean by "happiness," they can keep it.

Well, we don't want to give our happiness away.  ;D

Most Finns are different from me. I am a weirdo, an Elgar fan in the land of Sibelius...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 22, 2021, 07:38:22 AM
Apparently* 49 % of Republican men aren't getting the vaccine.  :-X


* According to my Youtube sources at least...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 22, 2021, 08:41:19 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on March 22, 2021, 04:05:08 AM
That would seem to be the simplest solution:  if you feel the 71dB or anyone can't be reasoned with, then don't try.



     What if you don't feel that way and reason with him instead? I do that and have suffered no indignities.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 22, 2021, 08:48:47 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 22, 2021, 07:38:22 AM
Apparently* 49 % of Republican men aren't getting the vaccine.  :-X


* According to my Youtube sources at least...

     They want to repeal and replace the vaccine.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 22, 2021, 09:10:34 AM
Quote from: drogulus on March 22, 2021, 08:41:19 AM
     What if you don't feel that way and reason with him instead? I do that and have suffered no indignities.

What you say makes a lot of sense to me and you come out to me as a knowledgeable dude.  ;)

Quote from: drogulus on March 22, 2021, 08:48:47 AM
     They want to repeal and replace the vaccine.

Who needs vaccines when you are already injected with stupidity?  ::)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on March 22, 2021, 10:01:43 AM
Quote from: drogulus on March 22, 2021, 08:41:19 AM
     What if you don't feel that way and reason with him instead? I do that and have suffered no indignities.

Well, good for you.

I like 71dB, he has my sympathy, but it's kind of hard to see the MfA being argued for the fiftieth time.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 22, 2021, 10:29:24 AM
Quote from: Herman on March 22, 2021, 10:01:43 AM
I like 71dB, he has my sympathy, but it's kind of hard to see the MfA being argued for the fiftieth time.

At times it might have gotten out of hand, but then again it is an important issue...

My strong allergy against right-wing smear tactics against MfA doesn't help...  :P

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 22, 2021, 05:46:12 PM
Washington Post Editorial Board opinion:
"In fact, Mr. Blinken's speech and other tough opening moves by the Biden team were exactly the reset that was needed after the Trump administration's confused and often contradictory treatment of China. As president, Donald Trump repeatedly heaped public praise on Mr. Xi and, in private meetings, reportedly encouraged his repression in Hong Kong and Xinjiang; President Biden bluntly told the dictator in their first phone call that Mr. Xi was wrong to believe in American decline. The day before last week's discussions in Anchorage, the administration sanctioned two dozen officials involved in the Hong Kong repression. And in an impressive joint action, the United States on Monday joined Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand in adopting new sanctions, in parallel with the European Union, against those involved in the genocidal campaign against Xinjiang's ethnic Uyghurs."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 22, 2021, 05:59:35 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 22, 2021, 05:46:12 PM
Washington Post Editorial Board opinion:
"In fact, Mr. Blinken's speech and other tough opening moves by the Biden team were exactly the reset that was needed after the Trump administration's confused and often contradictory treatment of China. As president, Donald Trump repeatedly heaped public praise on Mr. Xi and, in private meetings, reportedly encouraged his repression in Hong Kong and Xinjiang; President Biden bluntly told the dictator in their first phone call that Mr. Xi was wrong to believe in American decline. The day before last week's discussions in Anchorage, the administration sanctioned two dozen officials involved in the Hong Kong repression. And in an impressive joint action, the United States on Monday joined Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand in adopting new sanctions, in parallel with the European Union, against those involved in the genocidal campaign against Xinjiang's ethnic Uyghurs."

Obviously Trump's financial ties with China are stronger than those of Biden. The latter can be tougher with China while Trump got AT LEAST $54 million while in office from The Industrial and Commercial Bank of China for leased space in Trump Tower.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/danalexander/2020/10/23/forbes-estimates-china-paid-trump-at-least-54-million-since-he-took-office-via-mysterious-trump-tower-lease/
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on March 23, 2021, 04:43:05 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 22, 2021, 05:46:12 PM
Washington Post Editorial Board opinion:
"In fact, Mr. Blinken's speech and other tough opening moves by the Biden team were exactly the reset that was needed after the Trump administration's confused and often contradictory treatment of China. As president, Donald Trump repeatedly heaped public praise on Mr. Xi and, in private meetings, reportedly encouraged his repression in Hong Kong and Xinjiang; President Biden bluntly told the dictator in their first phone call that Mr. Xi was wrong to believe in American decline. The day before last week's discussions in Anchorage, the administration sanctioned two dozen officials involved in the Hong Kong repression. And in an impressive joint action, the United States on Monday joined Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand in adopting new sanctions, in parallel with the European Union, against those involved in the genocidal campaign against Xinjiang's ethnic Uyghurs."

I take that as a good thing.  I never liked the mixed messaging from the previous administration.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on March 23, 2021, 06:19:47 AM
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-03-23/eric-greitens-rides-fox-news-to-missouri-republican-comeback-trail

Right-Wing Media Resurrect a Republican Outcast
Party leaders are helpless to keep a disgraced former Missouri governor off the comeback trail.


Why yes, the Republican Party is at it again. This time, it's in Missouri, where former Governor Eric Greitens has announced that he's running for that state's open U.S. Senate seat in 2022. He's probably the front-runner for the Republican nomination.

Does his name ring a bell? Perhaps it's because he resigned in disgrace in 2018 to avoid likely impeachment by the Republican-majority legislature, and as part of a plea bargain.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on March 23, 2021, 06:30:28 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 22, 2021, 05:46:12 PM
Washington Post Editorial Board opinion:
"In fact, Mr. Blinken's speech and other tough opening moves by the Biden team were exactly the reset that was needed after the Trump administration's confused and often contradictory treatment of China. As president, Donald Trump repeatedly heaped public praise on Mr. Xi and, in private meetings, reportedly encouraged his repression in Hong Kong and Xinjiang; President Biden bluntly told the dictator in their first phone call that Mr. Xi was wrong to believe in American decline. The day before last week's discussions in Anchorage, the administration sanctioned two dozen officials involved in the Hong Kong repression. And in an impressive joint action, the United States on Monday joined Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand in adopting new sanctions, in parallel with the European Union, against those involved in the genocidal campaign against Xinjiang's ethnic Uyghurs."

Under Xi the People's Republic as fully reverted to a totalitarian dictatorship.  It would be bad enough if the meant only oppression of its own people, but in this case it also means a cynical and aggressive foreign policy.

As I a Canadian I can make note of the arbitrary detention and recently conviction of two Canadian business consultant on trumped-up charges of espionage.  In fact they were seized as hostages for the release of Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou.  Americans may be glad at least that Canada has chosen to honor extradition treaty obligations to the USA where she is charged with bank fraud in an attempt to evade US sanctions against Iran.

Still, confronting China for its internal and external misdeeds is a delicate balancing act.  China is already a super power in terms of economics, and the USA's unilateral application of tariffs on their exports isn't going to have much effect.  Thankfully the Biden administration has an inkling of an understanding the it has to be a multilateral effort by all major trading nations.

On the upside it looks like there is still room to explore with China a few issues such as climate changes that are of world-wide critical concern.  However on the military front China seems very keen to expand its capabilities and, given war is unthinkable, is ready for brinksmanship in the South China sea for example.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 23, 2021, 06:52:29 AM
Quote from: DavidW on March 23, 2021, 04:43:05 AM
I take that as a good thing.  I never liked the mixed messaging from the previous administration.

The mixed MESSaging from the previous administration benefitted Trump. That was the whole point of Trump's presidency. He just got half of Americans believe his presidency was about making American great again, because he is the king of conmen. Not MAGA, but MTR (Make Trump Richer).

Now Trump is planning to create his own social media platfrom after being kicked out of others. It should be called Twatter.  ;D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on March 23, 2021, 07:12:10 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/23/pro-trump-lawyer-sidney-powell-election-theft-claims-not-statements-of-fact.html

Pro-Trump lawyer Sidney Powell says 'no reasonable person' believes election claims were 'statements of fact'
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 23, 2021, 07:19:32 AM
Quote from: DavidW on March 23, 2021, 04:43:05 AM
I take that as a good thing.  I never liked the mixed messaging from the previous administration.

No kidding.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 23, 2021, 07:21:35 AM
Quote from: T. D. on March 23, 2021, 07:12:10 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/23/pro-trump-lawyer-sidney-powell-election-theft-claims-not-statements-of-fact.html

Pro-Trump lawyer Sidney Powell says 'no reasonable person' believes election claims were 'statements of fact'

Yet another non-defense.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on March 23, 2021, 07:26:38 AM
Quote from: T. D. on March 23, 2021, 07:12:10 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/23/pro-trump-lawyer-sidney-powell-election-theft-claims-not-statements-of-fact.html

Pro-Trump lawyer Sidney Powell says 'no reasonable person' believes election claims were 'statements of fact'

Had to check, and yes, she's referring to her own claims ...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 23, 2021, 07:44:00 AM
Quote from: T. D. on March 23, 2021, 07:12:10 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/23/pro-trump-lawyer-sidney-powell-election-theft-claims-not-statements-of-fact.html

Pro-Trump lawyer Sidney Powell says 'no reasonable person' believes election claims were 'statements of fact'

She is effectively admitting no reasonable person should believe anything she says, because she is not much into statements-of-fact.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 23, 2021, 07:49:18 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on March 23, 2021, 07:26:38 AM
Had to check, and yes, she's referring to her own claims ...

These selfish opportunists say the craziest things in order to gain the support of other crazies and when they get into trouble for what they said, the backpedaling can be quite humiliating and a source of verbal/intellectual acrobacy of comical level.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 23, 2021, 08:09:33 AM

     
Quote from: T. D. on March 23, 2021, 07:12:10 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/23/pro-trump-lawyer-sidney-powell-election-theft-claims-not-statements-of-fact.html

Pro-Trump lawyer Sidney Powell says 'no reasonable person' believes election claims were 'statements of fact'

     That's not a rebuttal of the charge. Powell told lies that harmed the company, and she told them to "no reasonable" persons and everyone else. How is it a defense of her scheme that courts were reasonable and not "no"?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on March 23, 2021, 10:29:59 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 23, 2021, 07:21:35 AM
Yet another non-defense.

But it works as a legal defense.  It worked for Tucker Carlson.  The settlement in that case should have included a stipulation that Carlson's show should always be preceded by a disclaimer that "The following program is for entertainment purposes only.  No statements made by Tucker Carlson or his guests should be taken as statements of fact."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 23, 2021, 11:00:06 AM
Quote from: Daverz on March 23, 2021, 10:29:59 AM
But it works as a legal defense.  It worked for Tucker Carlson.  The settlement in that case should have included a stipulation that Carlson's show should always be preceded by a disclaimer that "The following program is for entertainment purposes only.  No statements made by Tucker Carlson or his guests should be taken as statements of fact."

     I can't stomach a legal view that Tucker's audience consists of unreasonable people. That only true empirically. Besides, it's not only reasonable people who can cause harm.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on March 23, 2021, 11:08:12 AM
Quote from: drogulus on March 23, 2021, 11:00:06 AM
     I can't stomach a legal view that Tucker's audience consists of unreasonable people. That only true empirically. Besides, it's not only reasonable people who can cause harm.

I think the reasonable people watching it are interns for John Oliver's show.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on March 23, 2021, 01:08:43 PM
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-03-23/trump-s-election-lawyer-throws-him-under-the-bus-in-dominion-lawsuit

Sidney Powell is trying a brazen and bizarre argument in defending herself against a defamation lawsuit by Dominion Voting Systems.

Sidney Powell, one of Donald Trump's former lawyers, is being sued by Dominion Voting Systems for defamation. Her lawyers have entered a truly astonishing defense: that her statements alleging the Democratic Party stole the election using the company's vote counting software can't be defamation because no reasonable person would have believed them.

The defense is legally wrong. Her statements were clearly assertions of fact — and they were believed by many members of the public.

Nevertheless, it is a fascinating argument — an acknowledgement that any claim associated with Trump could be considered mere bluster, even when framed in factual terms. In short, Powell's defense is to throw Trump under the bus. The basic idea: He is such a known liar that any assertion made on his behalf in an election can't be taken as remotely plausible.
...
The brief points out that Powell's statements were made as part of Trump's post-election campaign to overturn the result. It insists they were her opinions and legal theories — and, by extension, Trump's.  They were, the brief says, merely "claims that await testing by the courts through the adversary process" — as though promising to prove facts in court means those aren't facts at all. The brief also shows screenshots of Powell on Fox News — as if to suggest that nothing said on Fox could be susceptible of being considered fact.

The thrust of the argument is that anything coming from Trump's camp cannot be taken seriously as a factual statement. It was, Powell's lawyers are saying, all rhetoric and opinion all the time, and reasonable people knew it.

You would think that the evident fact that many Republicans do believe exactly what Powell asserted would stand in the way of her argument. Not at all. Her lawyers imply either that those people aren't reasonable, or else that they must be lying about what they think.
...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on March 23, 2021, 02:29:25 PM
Quote from: T. D. on March 23, 2021, 07:12:10 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/23/pro-trump-lawyer-sidney-powell-election-theft-claims-not-statements-of-fact.html

Pro-Trump lawyer Sidney Powell says 'no reasonable person' believes election claims were 'statements of fact'
Yes, I read that earlier...she's basically said that she's guilty and no defense.  Will have to check out that other link.

PD

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 23, 2021, 04:31:45 PM

     North Korea Fires Off First Missiles of Biden Presidency (https://www.thedailybeast.com/north-korea-fires-off-first-missiles-of-bidens-presidency?ref=home?ref=home)

     Now are the Kim missiles.

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 23, 2021, 05:39:33 PM
Was only a matter of time.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on March 24, 2021, 07:08:20 AM
Quote from: T. D. on March 23, 2021, 01:08:43 PM
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-03-23/trump-s-election-lawyer-throws-him-under-the-bus-in-dominion-lawsuit

Sidney Powell is trying a brazen and bizarre argument in defending herself against a defamation lawsuit by Dominion Voting Systems.

Sidney Powell, one of Donald Trump's former lawyers, is being sued by Dominion Voting Systems for defamation. Her lawyers have entered a truly astonishing defense: that her statements alleging the Democratic Party stole the election using the company's vote counting software can't be defamation because no reasonable person would have believed them.

The defense is legally wrong. Her statements were clearly assertions of fact — and they were believed by many members of the public.

Nevertheless, it is a fascinating argument — an acknowledgement that any claim associated with Trump could be considered mere bluster, even when framed in factual terms. In short, Powell's defense is to throw Trump under the bus. The basic idea: He is such a known liar that any assertion made on his behalf in an election can't be taken as remotely plausible.
...
The brief points out that Powell's statements were made as part of Trump's post-election campaign to overturn the result. It insists they were her opinions and legal theories — and, by extension, Trump's.  They were, the brief says, merely "claims that await testing by the courts through the adversary process" — as though promising to prove facts in court means those aren't facts at all. The brief also shows screenshots of Powell on Fox News — as if to suggest that nothing said on Fox could be susceptible of being considered fact.

The thrust of the argument is that anything coming from Trump's camp cannot be taken seriously as a factual statement. It was, Powell's lawyers are saying, all rhetoric and opinion all the time, and reasonable people knew it.

You would think that the evident fact that many Republicans do believe exactly what Powell asserted would stand in the way of her argument. Not at all. Her lawyers imply either that those people aren't reasonable, or else that they must be lying about what they think.
...

... And of course she is saying that millions who believed her, or Trump, are not reasonable people ... which, come to that, I agree with.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 24, 2021, 09:14:43 AM

     Massive cargo ship becomes wedged, blocks Egypt's Suez Canal (https://news.yahoo.com/massive-cargo-ship-turns-sideways-024358197.html)

     Mitch?

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on March 24, 2021, 12:42:31 PM
Quote from: drogulus on March 24, 2021, 09:14:43 AM
     Massive cargo ship becomes wedged, blocks Egypt's Suez Canal (https://news.yahoo.com/massive-cargo-ship-turns-sideways-024358197.html)

     Mitch?
Pardon, but I'm not understanding your point?  I feel horrible for the blockage and danger to many ships, the crews, and the cargo....and for the people and countries that are trying to give and receive goods.  Perhaps it's partly due to climate changes re winds and/or maybe trying to build the ships too big (see article re size) of the ship involved; note:  this is the second time that this ship has been stuck.

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on March 24, 2021, 12:50:26 PM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on March 24, 2021, 12:42:31 PM
Pardon, but I'm not understanding your point?  I feel horrible for the blockage and danger to many ships, the crews, and the cargo....and for the people and countries that are trying to give and receive goods.  Perhaps it's partly due to climate changes re winds and/or maybe trying to build the ships too big (see article re size) of the ship involved; note:  this is the second time that this ship has been stuck.

PD

It's a joke. Mitch McConnell, as Senate majority leader under Trump and since, has obstructed virtually all national legislation in the U.S. At least I think that's what he meant.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on March 24, 2021, 01:02:20 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on March 24, 2021, 12:50:26 PM
It's a joke. Mitch McConnell, as Senate majority leader under Trump and since, has obstructed virtually all national legislation in the U.S. At least I think that's what he meant.

That is how I read it too.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on March 24, 2021, 02:38:44 PM
Quote from: Fëanor on March 24, 2021, 07:08:20 AM
... And of course she is saying that millions who believed her, or Trump, and not reasonable people ... which, come to that, I agree with.

The column referenced was a Bloomberg op-ed piece, and I read it as somewhat of a troll.

Seems to me the incomprehensible Powell (what jurisdiction could possibly have admitted such a moron to the bar???  ::)) is really throwing Faux News and other right-wing "alternative media" under the bus. Faux News is being sued by Dominion, and I fully expected their defense to go along the lines of "...well, I don't know if it's true, but a lot of really smart people say so..." (a la Cheeto Mussolini in numerous press conferences re. QAnon, etc). May have to rethink that one...

OTOH, we're dealing with the GOP/alt-right/alternative media world here, where things like truth and logic have little currency, so I have no idea WTF will transpire.  :laugh:
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on March 25, 2021, 06:01:54 AM
Quote from: T. D. on March 24, 2021, 02:38:44 PM
The column referenced was a Bloomberg op-ed piece, and I read it as somewhat of a troll.

Seems to me the incomprehensible Powell (what jurisdiction could possibly have admitted such a moron to the bar???  ::)) is really throwing Faux News and other right-wing "alternative media" under the bus. Faux News is being sued by Dominion, and I fully expected their defense to go along the lines of "...well, I don't know if it's true, but a lot of really smart people say so..." (a la Cheeto Mussolini in numerous press conferences re. QAnon, etc). May have to rethink that one...

OTOH, we're dealing with the GOP/alt-right/alternative media world here, where things like truth and logic have little currency, so I have no idea WTF will transpire.  :laugh:

See "truthiness" ... https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/truthiness-meaning-word-origin (https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/truthiness-meaning-word-origin).  Thank you, Stephen Colbert.  :)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on March 25, 2021, 12:19:46 PM
I find it interesting that Roger Stone was using members of the Oath Keepers as a personal security detail, including the wife of Kelly Meggs, the group's leader, at the time Meggs was plotting sedition with the Proud Boys and the Three Percenters. In other Stone news, it has come to light that Roger has a tattoo of Trump's face on his ass!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: André Le Nôtre on March 25, 2021, 12:36:16 PM
Quote from: DavidW on March 24, 2021, 01:02:20 PM
That is how I read it too.

Perhaps another interpretation is that the ship symbolizes McConnell as a gigantic turd that is (still!) stuck very far up Trump's ass--with the canal itself symbolizing Trump's Big Mac-encrusted colon.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 25, 2021, 04:08:36 PM

     Tucker Carlson Accuses Biden of Faking Mental Sharpness for More Than an Hour

WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—Calling it a "scandal bigger than Watergate," the Fox News host Tucker Carlson accused President Biden of "thoroughly faking mental sharpness" for more than an hour during his press conference on Thursday.

"Doing everything he could to give the appearance of mental acuity, he answered questions in detail, stayed on point, and uttered suspiciously complete sentences," Carlson alleged. "I've seen some shameless stunts in my time, but this one takes the cake."

Carlson said that Biden's "desperate charade" extended to "accomplishing concrete things to make himself seem competent."

"When he said that he would double the number of vaccinations in his first hundred days, my jaw dropped," he said. "President Trump would never have tried to pull something like that."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on March 25, 2021, 04:57:40 PM
Ernie, that reads like an Onion article!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on March 25, 2021, 06:07:46 PM
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-03-25/georgia-governor-signs-sweeping-overhaul-of-state-elections

Georgia Governor Brian Kemp signed an overhaul of election laws Thursday shortly after it cleared the state legislature -- and less than three months after Georgia voters gave Democrats control of the U.S. Senate.

Justified as restoring "integrity" after unfounded allegations of voter fraud in the 2020 presidential election, the new law has been described as an act of voter suppression by opponents. The measure requires identification for mail-in absentee voting for the first time, shortens the time for runoffs from nine weeks to four, cuts the window for requesting mail ballots and restricts the use of ballot drop boxes that eased voting during the Covid-19 pandemic.


On Jan. 5, high turnout among Black voters drove the twin victories of Democrats Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff, stripping the Senate from Republican hands.

The measure also strips the top election official, Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, of his role as chairman of the elections board. Raffensperger had eased voting rules in the pandemic and resisted former President Donald Trump's unfounded claims of a stolen election. The legislature will now choose the elections board chairman.

Introduced this week, the bill passed both chambers of the legislature within days. It doesn't include some of the most controversial proposals Republican lawmakers initially proposed: a requirement that many voters provide a photocopy of their driver's license when requesting a mail ballot, and a measure that would've ended no-excuse absentee voting.

The law also does not cut in half Sunday voting -- used heavily by Black voters who attend church -- as Republicans initially had proposed. In fact, it expands weekend early balloting, including by letting counties approve Sunday voting.

The measure is certain to be challenged in court
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 25, 2021, 08:46:02 PM

Quote from: DavidW on March 25, 2021, 04:57:40 PM
Ernie, that reads like an Onion article!

     Andy Borowitz writes satire for The New Yorker.

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on March 26, 2021, 04:01:08 AM
Quote from: T. D. on March 25, 2021, 06:07:46 PM
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-03-25/georgia-governor-signs-sweeping-overhaul-of-state-elections

Georgia Governor Brian Kemp signed an overhaul of election laws Thursday shortly after it cleared the state legislature -- and less than three months after Georgia voters gave Democrats control of the U.S. Senate.
...

In real federal democracies Federal districts, voter registration, and election operations are control by non-partisan Federal commissions -- more illustration of why the USA is not a full democracy and evidence that that was not the intent of the "founding fathers".

FWIW, Americans should consider that slavery would have been ended much sooner and without the Civil War had the USA been a proper federal democracy.

BTW, you guys should also recognized that the 60 vote Senate rule, (that originated as pro-segregation measure), is another travesty of democracy.  I.e. both in itself and because in happens in a Senate dominated by "fly over" states with small, predominantly rural populations.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 26, 2021, 05:21:11 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on March 26, 2021, 04:01:08 AM
In real federal democracies Federal districts, voter registration, and election operations are control by non-partisan Federal commissions -- more illustration of why the USA is not a full democracy and evidence that that was not the intent of the "founding fathers".

FWIW, Americans should consider that slavery would have been ended much sooner and without the Civil War had the USA been a proper federal democracy.

BTW, you guys should also recognized that the 60 vote Senate rule, (that originated as pro-segregation measure), is another travesty of democracy.  I.e. both in itself and because in happens in a Senate dominated by "fly over" states with small, predominantly rural populations.

This is on point. The US "democracy" is a system tailored to uphold the privileges of rich white men.

Rich white men don't need/want Medicare for All
Rich white men don't need/want $15 living wage
Rich white men don't need/want tuition free education
Rich white men don't need/want well-functioning democracy

A pattern emerging perhaps? The politics in the US is very simple to follow when you know to whom the system is rigged for.  :P


Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 26, 2021, 05:42:13 AM
Quote from: drogulus on March 25, 2021, 04:08:36 PM
     Tucker Carlson Accuses Biden of Faking Mental Sharpness for More Than an Hour

WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—Calling it a "scandal bigger than Watergate," the Fox News host Tucker Carlson accused President Biden of "thoroughly faking mental sharpness" for more than an hour during his press conference on Thursday.

"Doing everything he could to give the appearance of mental acuity, he answered questions in detail, stayed on point, and uttered suspiciously complete sentences," Carlson alleged. "I've seen some shameless stunts in my time, but this one takes the cake."

Carlson said that Biden's "desperate charade" extended to "accomplishing concrete things to make himself seem competent."

"When he said that he would double the number of vaccinations in his first hundred days, my jaw dropped," he said. "President Trump would never have tried to pull something like that."


I have to say Biden looks much sharper now than he looked during the presidential campaign. One explanation is that all this political activity really has improved his mental acuity. Doing mentally challenging stuff keeps the brain functioning. Maybe he just got mentally "rusty" after being Obama's VP and doing nothing for a while? That's all good, but the fundamental problem remains: He is not lefty enough for what the country desperately needs. There is a water crisis in Texas caused by the winter storm a month ago and black communities have been without water for weeks. Nobody cares about these people, not even the president.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on March 26, 2021, 06:29:33 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 26, 2021, 05:21:11 AM
This is on point. The US "democracy" is a system tailored to uphold the privileges of rich white men.

Rich white men don't need/want Medicare for All
Rich white men don't need/want $15 living wage
Rich white men don't need/want tuition free education
Rich white men don't need/want well-functioning democracy

A pattern emerging perhaps? The politics in the US is very simple to follow when you know to whom the system is rigged for.  :P
But the only pattern here is Rich people, not Rich white men.



Quote from: 71 dB on March 26, 2021, 05:42:13 AM
There is a water crisis in Texas caused by the winter storm a month ago and black communities have been without water for weeks. Nobody cares about these people, not even the president.
I think that problem is over... not seeing any news about that more recent than 3 weeks ago.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 26, 2021, 06:38:27 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 26, 2021, 05:42:13 AM
I have to say Biden looks much sharper now than he looked during the presidential campaign. One explanation is that all this political activity really has improved his mental acuity. Doing mentally challenging stuff keeps the brain functioning. Maybe he just got mentally "rusty" after being Obama's VP and doing nothing for a while? That's all good, but the fundamental problem remains: He is not lefty enough for what the country desperately needs. There is a water crisis in Texas caused by the winter storm a month ago and black communities have been without water for weeks. Nobody cares about these people, not even the president.

     He is not lefty enough to satisfy the demands for performative leftism. The purpose of moderate left pols is to enact what the left wants and can realistically get. The point is to succeed in making aspirations "ex-radical".
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on March 26, 2021, 08:49:35 AM
Quote from: drogulus on March 26, 2021, 06:38:27 AM
     He is not lefty enough to satisfy the demands for performative leftism. The purpose of moderate left pols is to enact what the left wants and can realistically get. The point is to succeed in making aspirations "ex-radical".
Whether this is accurate or not... This is about the most unflattering thing you could say about the moderate left, though.  ???



(to clarify, i'm not talking about health care)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 26, 2021, 09:08:30 AM
     The Decline of Republican Demonization (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/25/opinion/republicans-biden-stimulus.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage)

     Paul Krugman muses on why Repubs are "low energy" in opposition to Biden's legislative agenda.

     My preferred explanation, which Krug mentions, is that Repubs no longer have the chops, and lost the ability to formulate counterproposals that even meet the dismally low threshold of "Republican alternative". The rot is so deep they couldn't even agree on repealing and (heh!) replacing OCare when they had control.

Quote from: greg on March 26, 2021, 08:49:35 AM
Whether this is accurate or not... This is about the most unflattering thing you could say about the moderate left, though.  ???



(to clarify, i'm not talking about health care)

     I don't know why you think that. I certainly don't agree that the kind of strategizing involved in getting from "it's too radical to ever happen" to "keep your dirty government hands off my ObamaCare!" is something to complain about. I sometimes complain about the timidity of moderates who think Mitch is the All Powerful Oz. That's what he wants you to think.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on March 26, 2021, 10:04:34 AM
Quote from: drogulus on March 26, 2021, 09:08:30 AM
I don't know why you think that. I certainly don't agree that the kind of strategizing involved in getting from "it's too radical to ever happen" to "keep your dirty government hands off my ObamaCare!" is something to complain about. I sometimes complain about the timidity of moderates who think Mitch is the All Powerful Oz. That's what he wants you to think.
It sounds like a paranoid right-wing perspective, though.

"Try to get what they can get" and "ex-radical" sounds like left moderates want the same thing extreme leftists want, the difference being that left moderates are just playing the long game, and extreme leftists are going for revolution (short game, and unrealistic). Which would be like saying people left moderates are communists in disguise.

Maybe it's the way you phrased it?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on March 26, 2021, 10:12:56 AM
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-03-26/arrest-of-georgia-lawmaker-sharpens-debate-on-voting-bills

The arrest of a Black Georgia state lawmaker who was seeking entry to Governor Brian Kemp's closed-door signing of a sweeping election law is placing a sharper scrutiny on Republican-led statehouses' pursuit of voting restrictions.

State Representative Park Cannon, a Democrat, was released from jail early Friday after she was handcuffed and arrested by two White Georgia State Patrol officers as supporters demanded to know what law she violated.

She had knocked on Kemp's office door in the statehouse where he was signing a law that changes voting access rules in Georgia. Often a public ceremony for popular bills, the bill-signing took place behind closed doors with no media presence.

The incident prompted a range of angry protests, including from Georgia's newly elected Democratic senators, Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff.

"I am not the first Georgian to be arrested for fighting voter suppression. I'd love to say I'm the last, but we know that isn't true," Cannon tweeted after her release from jail. She blasted the bill signed by Kemp as a hateful measure restricting "many methods of voting" that "serve no purpose other than to keep voters from exercising their constitutional right to vote."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 26, 2021, 10:14:58 AM
Quote from: greg on March 26, 2021, 06:29:33 AM
But the only pattern here is Rich people, not Rich white men.

Yes, being rich is by far most important. Being also white and male helps a little bit more. 

Quote from: greg on March 26, 2021, 06:29:33 AMI think that problem is over... not seeing any news about that more recent than 3 weeks ago.

Well, it SEEMS like that if you only follow MSM news coverage. They don't give a fuck. You need to follow independent journalists to know what is happening in the country.

Can Texas Be Ground Zero for National Rent Strike?

https://www.youtube.com/v/ttmqU92tjKc

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on March 26, 2021, 11:07:05 AM
Quote from: drogulus on March 26, 2021, 06:38:27 AM
     He is not lefty enough to satisfy the demands for performative leftism. The purpose of moderate left pols is to enact what the left wants and can realistically get. The point is to succeed in making aspirations "ex-radical".

Indeed there is effectively no Left in the USA, at most a Center-left, contrary the fear mongering of Republicans and Alt-right.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 26, 2021, 11:44:18 AM
Quote from: greg on March 26, 2021, 10:04:34 AM
It sounds like a paranoid right-wing perspective, though.

"Try to get what they can get" and "ex-radical" sounds like left moderates want the same thing extreme leftists want, the difference being that left moderates are just playing the long game, and extreme leftists are going for revolution (short game, and unrealistic). Which would be like saying people left moderates are communists in disguise.

Maybe it's the way you phrased it?

     I'm talking about the process by which solutions go from radical to accepted, which requires a delicate dance between the center and progressives. I don't think revolutionaries are part of that. They want to overthrow the system, not evolve it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 26, 2021, 01:33:05 PM
Quote from: drogulus on March 26, 2021, 11:44:18 AM
     I'm talking about the process by which solutions go from radical to accepted, which requires a delicate dance between the center and progressives. I don't think revolutionaries are part of that. They want to overthrow the system, not evolve it.

People who go bankrupt this year because of medical bills don't have 100 years to wait for incrementalists to finally reach a M4A system.
"Radical" ideas become accepted among regular people by educating them how the radical label is just a smear tactics to protect the rigged system for the rich.
The progressives are not radical.
Moderate Dems and Republicans are radicalised by corporate money.
Thinking corporate profits are more important and well-being of regular people is radical af.
You just need to educate people about that.
It's not even difficult. You just have to do it, reach out to people.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 26, 2021, 01:59:39 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 26, 2021, 01:33:05 PM

"Radical" ideas become accepted among regular people by educating them how the radical label is just a smear tactics to protect the rigged system for the rich.


     I think it works better if you don't try to educate people about the meaning of radical and just make them an offer they can't refuse. Then, when they have some free time they might come to the conclusion that this business of what's radical or what isn't is largely beside the point.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on March 26, 2021, 02:07:09 PM
Quote from: T. D. on March 26, 2021, 10:12:56 AM
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-03-26/arrest-of-georgia-lawmaker-sharpens-debate-on-voting-bills

The arrest of a Black Georgia state lawmaker who was seeking entry to Governor Brian Kemp's closed-door signing of a sweeping election law is placing a sharper scrutiny on Republican-led statehouses' pursuit of voting restrictions.

State Representative Park Cannon, a Democrat, was released from jail early Friday after she was handcuffed and arrested by two White Georgia State Patrol officers as supporters demanded to know what law she violated.

She had knocked on Kemp's office door in the statehouse where he was signing a law that changes voting access rules in Georgia. Often a public ceremony for popular bills, the bill-signing took place behind closed doors with no media presence.

The incident prompted a range of angry protests, including from Georgia's newly elected Democratic senators, Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff.

"I am not the first Georgian to be arrested for fighting voter suppression. I'd love to say I'm the last, but we know that isn't true," Cannon tweeted after her release from jail. She blasted the bill signed by Kemp as a hateful measure restricting "many methods of voting" that "serve no purpose other than to keep voters from exercising their constitutional right to vote."

Knocking on a door gets a black woman arrested? And a State Representative at that?

Anyone still remember (white male) Matt Gaetz and two dozen of his fellow house republicans much more aggressively and threateningly trying to get in and disrupt the "Secret Bunker Testimony" of Laura Cooper?

"LET US IN! LET US IN!": HOW MATT GAETZ, JIM JORDAN, AND HOUSE REPUBLICANS BUSTED INTO TOP SECRET IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS—AND ORDERED PIZZA
Egged on by Trump, they compromised the House's Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility, putting national security at risk. As Rep. Eric Swalwell recalls, they chanted, they yelled, and they ordered pizza—lots of pizza. (https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/06/how-house-republicans-busted-into-top-secret-impeachment-hearings)


and interesting rereading that what a forewarning it now seems
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on March 26, 2021, 03:08:42 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on March 26, 2021, 02:07:09 PM
Knocking on a door gets a black woman arrested? And a State Representative at that?

Anyone still remember (white male) Matt Gaetz and two dozen of his fellow house republicans much more aggressively and threateningly trying to get in and disrupt the "Secret Bunker Testimony" of Laura Cooper?

"LET US IN! LET US IN!": HOW MATT GAETZ, JIM JORDAN, AND HOUSE REPUBLICANS BUSTED INTO TOP SECRET IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS—AND ORDERED PIZZA
Egged on by Trump, they compromised the House's Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility, putting national security at risk. As Rep. Eric Swalwell recalls, they chanted, they yelled, and they ordered pizza—lots of pizza. (https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/06/how-house-republicans-busted-into-top-secret-impeachment-hearings)

and interesting rereading that what a forewarning it now seems

Cheeto Mussolini rewarded Jordan with the nation's highest civilian honor:
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/trump-rewards-gop-ally-rep-jim-jordan-with-medal-of-freedom

Same Jordan who's been widely accused of covering up sexual abuse scandal while a wrestling coach at Ohio State U:

https://www.esquire.com/sports/a35120040/richard-strauss-ohio-state-wrestling-sexual-abuse/

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 26, 2021, 07:57:10 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 26, 2021, 01:33:05 PM

You just need to educate people about that.
It's not even difficult. You just have to do it, reach out to people.

How are you doing with "educating" us?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 27, 2021, 04:07:02 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 26, 2021, 07:57:10 PM
How are you doing with "educating" us?

I think a bunch of classical music fans are not statistically relevant and also too much into the thinking of MSM maybe?
Reaching to people means minimum wage workers for example.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on March 27, 2021, 05:00:09 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 26, 2021, 07:57:10 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 26, 2021, 01:33:05 PM
Thinking corporate profits are more important and well-being of regular people is radical af.
You just need to educate people about that.
It's not even difficult. You just have to do it, reach out to people.

How are you doing with "educating" us?

Granted, Americans take umbrage at us foreigner's criticizing their nation.  After all, theirs is the greatest nation and first and greatest democracy in the world;  how can we lessor folk presume to suggest improvements?

71 dB, expect this sort of reaction.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 27, 2021, 05:10:57 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on March 27, 2021, 05:00:09 AM
How are you doing with "educating" us?


Granted, Americans take umbrage at us foreigner's criticizing their nation.  After all, theirs is the greatest nation and first and greatest democracy in the world;  how can we lessor folk presume to suggest improvements?

71 dB, expect this sort of reaction.

I've seen sharper analyses of my oosts in fortune cookies.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 27, 2021, 08:40:29 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 27, 2021, 04:07:02 AM

Reaching to people means minimum wage workers for example.

     What reaches minimum wage workers is action to improve their lives. It should not escape notice that Biden is in favor of helping working class people, and this is not just an end but a means of reconnection with an important part of the traditional Dem coalition.
     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 27, 2021, 11:08:00 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on March 27, 2021, 05:00:09 AM
Granted, Americans take umbrage at us foreigner's criticizing their nation.  After all, theirs is the greatest nation and first and greatest democracy in the world;  how can we lessor folk presume to suggest improvements?

71 dB, expect this sort of reaction.

It is not the fault of us foreigners the US sucks at so many things it should excel given how rich country we are talking about. The fact that we foreigners are suggesting improvements tells about how we CARE about the US and its people. First you point out problems. Then you start fixing those problems. In Texas black communities without water are told to take water out of swimming pools and boil the water before drinking it! So, in the richest country in the World people the treated worse than animals. Yes, we foreigners are on point saying the US sucks. The day in the US every person has save clean drinkable tap water the country sucks less.

Yes, Fëanor, we can expect his sort of reaction. I have gotten used to it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: ritter on March 27, 2021, 11:20:09 AM
This is really over the top...I am not American, I admire many things of that country, I think there's also many things that can be improved there, but I take strong exception to some bloke in Finland (who barely knows the US, unless it's from propaganda on YouTube) insulting the place day in and day out.

Enough is enough....
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on March 27, 2021, 11:29:14 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 27, 2021, 05:10:57 AM
I've seen sharper analyses of my oosts in fortune cookies.

Perhaps fortune cookies is where you get most of you insights?  :blank:
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 27, 2021, 11:41:38 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 27, 2021, 05:10:57 AM
I've seen sharper analyses of my oosts in fortune cookies.

It would explain a lot if it turned out your political knowledge is from fortune cookies.  ;D

You are so defensive Karl. Relax a bit. This becomes easier for you when you accept the fact outsiders really can provide valuable insight on certain things. Parents moaning about their children doing poorly in school don't hate their children. Similarly we foreigners don't hate the US pointing out things that suck. What I hate is the reasons (oligarchy, corruption, greed etc.) why those things suck, not the country.

I understand it is hard when your worldview get challenged hard, but that's how our understanding increases. I used to support Hillary Clinton in 2016 not knowing the (corporate) Dems are ALSO utterly corrupt. After the election I wanted to know why Hillary lost and started following US politics more closely. I learned the truth and about the reasons why Trump won. I accepted being wrong for three decades about the Dems. I could be still in denial about the truth, but I am not.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on March 27, 2021, 12:06:37 PM
Quote from: ritter on March 27, 2021, 11:20:09 AM
This is really over the top...I am not American, I admire many things of that country, I think there's also many things that can be improved there, but I take strong exception to some bloke in Finland (who barely knows the US, unless it's from propaganda on YouTube) insulting the place day in and day out.

Enough is enough....

+1

71s language would be called racism if any other country were the subject.

And now he's learned that people dislike the use of the word"sucks" he puts it in every post. The way a troll would. The way he did when he was told any other term was insulting.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 27, 2021, 12:06:47 PM
Quote from: ritter on March 27, 2021, 11:20:09 AM
This is really over the top...I am not American, I admire many things of that country, I think there's also many things that can be improved there, but I take strong exception to some bloke in Finland (who barely knows the US, unless it's from propaganda on YouTube) insulting the place day in and day out.

Enough is enough....

I am happy to discuss about the propaganda on Youtube.

The word "propaganda" has negative connotation. Therefore, using the word only makes sense when it is used to describe negative things, for example anti-vaxxer propaganda. If we start using the word "propaganda" with any things including positive things (e.g. animal rights propaganda), the connotation changes and the world kind of loses its meaning. Why use it, when it can mean negative or positive things?

I am sorry, but I find it intellectually lazy to just discredit Youtubers for being Youtubers AS IF THE PLATFORM dictated how much you know. MSM has had monopoly for decades, but they are biased toward corporations and the establishment*. Thanks to Youtubers, ALTERNATIVE voices biased in other ways have a platform. People should listen to everything and USE THEIR FUCKING HEAD to dictate who makes sense and who doesn't!

To dismiss Youtubers as useless propaganda you have to know what they say, otherwise you are simply assuming things (full of shit). If you know what they say you can make your own claims about why their propaganda is useless. Make a damn argument!

* If you are too dumb to know why this is: 1) they want "access" to politicials so they are overtly nice to the establisment. 2) Corporations run adds. If you start talking about M4A too positively  Big Pharma gets angry and stops buying medicine add (in Finland medicine adds are illegal, because Finland is a sane country and medical adds don't make sense: Doctors tell people what medicine to use and when. In the US medical adds are shown to funnel money to the MSM to buy them to be critical toward M4A).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on March 27, 2021, 12:08:34 PM
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-03-27/georgia-voting-law-shows-consequences-of-trump-s-false-claims

If elections have consequences, as the cliché goes, then so do lies. Both kinds of consequences were on display this week in Georgia.

On the same night that former President Donald Trump was on Fox News minimizing the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, Georgia Governor Brian Kemp signed a law restricting voting rights in the state. Think of it as the legislative response to Trump's false claim that rampant voter fraud denied him a victory in Georgia.

With his comments — among other observations, he said that the Jan. 6 mob was "zero threat" to the police or Congress —  Trump was attempting to create an alibi for those who came to Washington because he told them the election was stolen and marched on the Capitol in his name. The work of federal law enforcement, building the case against the rioters, will now be fed into the Trumpist grievance grinder. How long before the attack itself is deemed yet another "hoax"?

No matter that one police officer died following his violent encounter with protesters, or that two others took their own lives shortly thereafter, or that countless others were injured, or that more than 400 people have been charged in connection to, yes, an insurrection designed to prevent the certification of Joe Biden's victory. Who are you going to believe — Trump or your own lying eyes?

Georgia's new election law, meanwhile, represents a sad 180-degree turn by Kemp — the same man who, despite enormous pressure from Trump, stood his ground on the integrity of Georgia's November election. That brief bravery placed a bullseye on Kemp's back. Not only has Trump targeted him for defeat next year, the former president has already endorsed a challenger to Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, who also stood up to Trump's (possibly illegal) intimidation tactics.

Kemp signed a law that removes much of the election oversight from local counties and the secretary of state — giving much authority to the state legislature. If there is a replay of 2020's close election in 2024, the legislature could very well disenfranchise Georgia voters, who may well cast a majority of their ballots to the Democrats. The test run will be in 2022, when not only is Kemp up for re-election but so is new Democratic U.S. Senator Raphael Warnock.

The legislation also includes language limiting the number of drop boxes for absentee ballots. They now can be placed only at early-voting locations and be open only during business hours. So the drop box where Kemp himself voted in November is no more.

True, Georgia Republicans were shamed into removing a suggested ban on Sunday voting efforts, which was apparently deemed too much of a blatant assault on Black "Souls to the Polls" voter-turnout efforts. They did, however, manage to make it a crime to give food or water to someone waiting to vote — an equally overt attempt at Black voter suppression.

There are fewer polling locations in predominantly Black neighborhoods in Georgia than in White ones. As a result, lines are consistently longer in Black neighborhoods. That was true in Atlanta in the primary and the general election. Add in language that reduces the number of early voting days and the net result is clear: a system designed to wear down Black voters.

If some Good Samaritan gives bottled water away, she has now committed a crime. While self-service water stations can be set up, how many will be needed if the line stretches around the corner? Think a voter will come to a polling place sufficiently well-hydrated for an endurance test? More likely, especially if it's hot, a hungry or tired voter will give up and head home.

For Georgia Republicans, that counts as mission accomplished. Or rather, vote suppressed.

So far, Trump's false claim about a stolen election has produced an insurrection at the U.S. Capitol and inspired an attempt at vote suppression in Georgia. (And similar legislation is being introduced in other states.) Republicans, with "evidence" largely arising from Trump's conspiratorial mind, say that the electoral system can no longer be trusted. Voters need to ask themselves whether, when it comes to protecting their rights, the Republican Party can be trusted.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 27, 2021, 12:12:45 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on March 27, 2021, 12:06:37 PM
+1

71s language would be called racism if any other country were the subject.

And now he's learned that people dislike the use of the word"sucks" he puts it in every post. The way a troll would. The way he did when he was told any other term was insulting.

That is an absurb accusation! A lot of the things I am complaining about is related to racism! How is it racism if I point out black communities in Texas have been forgotten in the middle to water crisis? What the fuck is wrong with you Simon? Are you out of your mind? I won't tolerate that kind of accusations! Shut up already is you don't have anything better to say. It is your own fault if you are so ignorant you don't know about the problems in the US.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: ritter on March 27, 2021, 12:31:12 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on March 27, 2021, 12:06:37 PM
+1

71s language would be called racism if any other country were the subject.

And now he's learned that people dislike the use of the word"sucks" he puts it in every post. The way a troll would. The way he did when he was told any other term was insulting.
Simon, I suggest you do not lower yourself to the level of this poster. He's perfectly entitled to his opinions, but not to hurl insults left, right and centre (at countries, whole groups of people, and individuals).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on March 27, 2021, 12:41:40 PM
Quote from: ritter on March 27, 2021, 12:31:12 PM
Simon, I suggest you do not lower yourself to the level of this poster. He's perfectly entitled to his opinions, but not to hurl insults left, right and centre (at countries, whole groups of people, and to individuals).

I used to wonder if I was just swinging at the low-hanging fruit when I would keep responding to posters like this.

What I've learned is that it's the "doubling-down" mentality that I want to understand. Why will someone keep making the same assertions when they've been convincingly disproved or contradicted by a variety of posters? What lynchpin concepts and keywords are employed? And what kind of arguments does it take to finally get through? The answers have real-world implications.  Its why I keep responding to Todd, even knowing its mostly fruitless.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on March 27, 2021, 12:46:51 PM
I have lost interest in this discussion and I have not participated in awhile.

One of the reasons is that I got tired of expressing my concerns over an issue, a Trumpster would accused me of being paranoid and then it turns out to be true.

An example is when a few months ago I stated my concern over the United States Postal Service.  A Trump ally accused me of imagining the decline.  Then the Trump appointed Postmaster General testified to Congress.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on March 27, 2021, 01:42:09 PM
I haven't seen any Trump allies on this thread since I joined in January.  How do you know that they are a Trumpster?  Did they tell you?  Or did you just decide they were?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on March 27, 2021, 02:13:21 PM
Quote from: DavidW on March 27, 2021, 01:42:09 PM
I haven't seen any Trump allies on this thread since I joined in January.  How do you know that they are a Trumpster?  Did they tell you?  Or did you just decide they were?

These are the types of questions that I find frustrating.

I am not going to waste my time going through a few thousand post to provide you with a list of the Trump supporters who have participated in this thread.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on March 27, 2021, 03:01:27 PM
Quote from: arpeggio on March 27, 2021, 02:13:21 PM
These are the types of questions that I find frustrating.

I am not going to waste my time going through a few thousand post to provide you with a list of the Trump supporters who have participated in this thread.

No my point is that you're jumping to conclusions and making assumptions just because they disagree with you. 

I think that if you were to come up with your list of alleged Trump supporters you would most likely find those people pissed off at you for making assumptions about their political identity.

BTW in case you want to add me to the list, I'm not a Trump supporter.  I'm not even conservative.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on March 27, 2021, 03:08:31 PM
O the original, now locked, version of this thread - Sound The Trumpets - there were a number of very vocal Trump cheerleaders. Some who liked tax cuts or whatever, a few others who sounded like typical troll-farm trolls. The "tax cut and judges justifies everything else" crowd got quieter with each passing year.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 27, 2021, 04:26:12 PM
     I'm not even conservative, too.

     I am somewhat perturbed by the notions behind the Biden tax scheme. Usually existing taxes mop up demand-side inflation, and when more spending is done more tax comes back with no need to fiddle with rates or offsets. So when some pol or pundit pulls the "howyougonna payforit?" trick my response is along the lines of "you are paying, you always pay, now get outta here!". (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/tongue.gif)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 27, 2021, 06:09:49 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on March 27, 2021, 03:08:31 PM
O the original, now locked, version of this thread - Sound The Trumpets - there were a number of very vocal Trump cheerleaders. Some who liked tax cuts or whatever, a few others who sounded like typical troll-farm trolls. The "tax cut and judges justifies everything else" crowd got quieter with each passing year.

Maybe the Trump supporters realized they aren't really rich enough to benefit from the tax cuts? Maybe they noticed how their healthcare premiums went up (because of Trump's attempts to sabotage/repeal Obamacare) more than the tax cuts saved them money? Maybe they just realized they were bamboozled by a fake populist conman who run for president to enrich himself?

Quote from: drogulus on March 27, 2021, 04:26:12 PM
     I'm not even conservative, too.

     I am somewhat perturbed by the notions behind the Biden tax scheme. Usually existing taxes mop up demand-side inflation, and when more spending is done more tax comes back with no need to fiddle with rates or offsets. So when some pol or pundit pulls the "howyougonna payforit?" trick my response is along the lines of "you are paying, you always pay, now get outta here!". (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/tongue.gif)

Americans don't really pay less taxes than for example people in Nordic countries when you take into account that in the US a lot of the taxes are private (such as healthcare premiums - it is a tax because Obamacare mandates it) so when you add normal and private taxes you end up high taxes. In the US the rich and corporations pay very little taxes, in same cases zero (e.g. Amazon) taxes so regular people need to pay more.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on March 27, 2021, 06:19:47 PM
https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-politics-legislature-local-elections-bills-73b331234cec8c966bb2308f6ed1696e

Partisan takeovers of election boards. Threats to fine county election officials and overturn results. Even bans on giving water to voters while they stand in line.

In addition to their nationwide efforts to limit access to the ballot, Republican lawmakers in some states are moving to gain greater control over the local mechanics of elections, from voter registration all the way to certifying results.

The bills, which have already become law in Georgia and Iowa, resurrect elements of former President Donald Trump's extraordinary campaign to subvert his loss, when his backers openly floated the notion of having legislatures override the will of the voters and launched legal challenges against measures that made it easier to vote during the coronavirus pandemic.

"It's an overreach of power," said Aunna Dennis, executive director of the Georgia chapter of the voting advocacy group Common Cause. "They're definitely trying to do an upheaval of our election system."

In a step widely interpreted as a way to check Georgia's Democratic strongholds, Republican Gov. Brian Kemp signed a bill Thursday to give the GOP-dominated Legislature greater influence over a state board that regulates elections and empowers it to remove local election officials deemed to be underperforming.

Other states are moving in similar directions.

In Iowa, after left-leaning counties sent voters absentee ballot applications in 2020, a recently signed law would bar election workers from sending the forms out unless requested and threatens to fine officials for violating rules. A South Carolina proposal would give lawmakers new oversight of the members appointed to the currently independent State Election Commission. In Arizona, a Republican proposal that has since died would have allowed the Legislature to overturn election results and appoint its own Electoral College representatives.

The Brennan Center for Justice, a public policy group that supports expanded voter access, tallied more than 250 restrictive proposals in the states, many of them intended to roll back voting methods that were expanded because of the pandemic. That includes early and mail voting options, both of which were popular among voters who sought to avoid virus transmission at crowded polling places.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on March 27, 2021, 06:22:56 PM
Quote from: DavidW on March 27, 2021, 03:01:27 PM
No my point is that you're jumping to conclusions and making assumptions just because they disagree with you. 

I think that if you were to come up with your list of alleged Trump supporters you would most likely find those people pissed off at you for making assumptions about their political identity.

BTW in case you want to add me to the list, I'm not a Trump supporter.  I'm not even conservative.

One of the other reasons I hate political discussions is when I am accused of being something I am not.

Do you really believe that I am this petty?

It bothers me whenever a person of intelligence makes bogus assumptions about me.

I give up  :(
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on March 27, 2021, 06:32:13 PM
There are people who are quick to judge someone else as a "Trump supporter" if they dare remotely question any accusation against him. Some here, but super common online in general.

Personally haven't seen that type of behavior from arpeggio, though.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on March 27, 2021, 07:03:27 PM
Quote from: greg on March 27, 2021, 06:32:13 PM
There are people who are quick to judge someone else as a "Trump supporter" if they dare remotely question any accusation against him. Some here, but super common online in general.

Personally haven't seen that type of behavior from arpeggio, though.

Thanks  :)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on March 27, 2021, 11:18:47 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 27, 2021, 04:07:02 AM
I think a bunch of classical music fans are not statistically relevant and also too much into the thinking of MSM maybe?
Reaching to people means minimum wage workers for example.

So, you're posting about MfA on GMG just to "educate" American minimum wage earners?

Isn't that Quixotic squared?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 27, 2021, 11:23:01 PM
Quote from: Herman on March 27, 2021, 11:18:47 PM
So, you're posting about MfA on GMG just to "educate" American minimum wage earners?

Isn't that Quixotic squared?

No. I am not that kind of educator obviously. I am sharing my opinions.

Why can't you just let me be what I am?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on March 27, 2021, 11:23:31 PM
Quote from: DavidW on March 27, 2021, 01:42:09 PM
I haven't seen any Trump allies on this thread since I joined in January.  How do you know that they are a Trumpster?  Did they tell you?  Or did you just decide they were?

There were at least four Trumpsters in the Diner, one of whom pretended to be on the fence, while being solidly in the Trump camp as soon as his fingers touched the keys.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on March 27, 2021, 11:28:54 PM
Quote from: ritter on March 27, 2021, 11:20:09 AM
This is really over the top...I am not American, I admire many things of that country, I think there's also many things that can be improved there, but I take strong exception to some bloke in Finland (who barely knows the US, unless it's from propaganda on YouTube) insulting the place day in and day out.

Enough is enough....

Going the "I feel insulted" route is usually not a good idea. It's annoying if somebody from overseas criticizes your country, but here is Texas' own Beto O'Rourke calling Texas "a failed state":

"O'Rourke, who was one of many Democratic presidential hopefuls in the 2020 cycle, has frequently criticized Texas Republican leadership, arguing that "stupid culture battles" have turned the Lone Star State into a "failed state" and obscured more pressing problems, such as COVID-19 vaccine distribution and the local impact of the pandemic."

The situation in Texas is or was very bad, due to political extremism by types like Abbott and Cruz.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 28, 2021, 01:52:26 AM
Quote from: Herman on March 27, 2021, 11:28:54 PM
Going the "I feel insulted" route is usually not a good idea. It's annoying if somebody from overseas criticizes your country, but here is Texas' own Beto O'Rourke calling Texas "a failed state":

I have told several times I have Asperger's meaning my style of communication lacks the focus on making other people "feel good." In my opinion Americans do better and are happier if they have (affordable) healthcare, clean drinkable tap water, paid vacation time by law, living wage, tuition free higher education and in general a less corrupted government that works (also) for regular people and can be trusted. We foreigners would do a disservice to Americans if we kept praising the US blindly despite of all the things that are wrong and could be much better.

My criticism is toward the corrupted system and greedy politicians who do not serve the regular people as they should and instead use their political power to enrich themselves and those who bribe them. The US should be a beacon of democracy, not an oligarchy. In general I don't have anything against Americans, not even MAGA people, because I know they are sadly misled victims of the system. The humane approach is to try to help misled people to find their way out of their rabbit holes (this is actually similar to convincing people to abandon their religious beliefs and become atheists). Regular people on the left and right should put aside small differences regarding cultural issues and work together to deal with the real divide in the country: The 1 % versus the 99 %.

Americans can feel flattered by the fact people in other countries are this interested of their politics. It's because we are talking about a superpower. Whoever is in power in the US matters all over the World.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 28, 2021, 02:34:12 AM
Looks like NYC Mayoral candidate Andrew Yang is in the process of transforming into a typical calculating Democrat.
He doesn't sound the same man he was just two years ago...  :P
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on March 28, 2021, 04:41:51 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 27, 2021, 06:09:49 PM
Americans don't really pay less taxes than for example people in Nordic countries when you take into account that in the US a lot of the taxes are private (such as healthcare premiums - it is a tax because Obamacare mandates it) so when you add normal and private taxes you end up high taxes. In the US the rich and corporations pay very little taxes, in same cases zero (e.g. Amazon) taxes so regular people need to pay more.

So painfully obvious but many (most?) Americans are oblivious to this common sense.  In Canada too we pay more tax but pay zero premiums for essential medical care.

I was amazed when a middle-aged American, (a poster on another forum), bragged that he paid "only" $13,000 for health insurance for his wife and himself.  I imagine they pay some income tax too.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on March 28, 2021, 04:59:53 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 28, 2021, 01:52:26 AM
My criticism is toward the corrupted system and greedy politicians who do not serve the regular people as they should and instead use their political power to enrich themselves and those who bribe them. The US should be a beacon of democracy, not an oligarchy. In general I don't have anything against Americans, not even MAGA people, because I know they are sadly misled victims of the system.
...

Many Americans failed to realize that their system was designed as an oligarchy from the start.  Most "found fathers", (where were the mothers but then we mustn't be anachronistic), were members of the elite of landowners and merchants and were explicitly fearful of the ordinary small-hold farmers and workers.  They designed the Constitution accordingly.

Also these elites who comprised the "founding fathers" were fearful of "central government" and sought to limit its power.  Part of it was that the only example of central government before them was the (irrelevant by then) British Parliament.  But more critical to understand was that the American colonies had be founded and evolved separately from each other and, (not withstanding British appointed governors in some cases), were largely managed by the oligarchic elites who contributed the FF.  Simply put, they were jealous of their local oligarchic control and didn't what to surrender much to a federal government.

This stuff is rarely taught in US publics schools.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 28, 2021, 05:47:31 AM
Quote from: ritter on March 27, 2021, 11:20:09 AM
This is really over the top...I am not American, I admire many things of that country, I think there's also many things that can be improved there, but I take strong exception to some bloke in Finland (who barely knows the US, unless it's from propaganda on YouTube) insulting the place day in and day out.

Enough is enough....

+ 2.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 28, 2021, 05:48:07 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on March 28, 2021, 04:59:53 AM
This stuff is rarely taught in US publics schools.

Is it routinely taught in Canadian public schools?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 28, 2021, 06:58:33 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on March 28, 2021, 04:41:51 AM
So painfully obvious but many (most?) Americans are oblivious to this common sense.  In Canada too we pay more tax but pay zero premiums for essential medical care.



     It's more important that good things are paid for than the exact architecture of the payment system. If you have a large poor class resources will be underutilized in a country that has the resources to use. Whole schools of economists are growed up to argue that the poor must stay that way because using all of our stuff will cause money to run out. The arguments make no sense since money systems aren't designed to run out at a nominal end point.

     Uh oh, starting tomorrow dollars won't spend!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on March 28, 2021, 07:00:53 AM
Quote from: Florestan on March 28, 2021, 05:48:07 AM
Is it routinely taught in Canadian public schools?

Do you deny what I've said?  Can you refute it?

Unfortunately history is glossed in public schools in most countries.  What do they teach in Romania?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on March 28, 2021, 07:02:58 AM
Quote from: Florestan on March 28, 2021, 05:47:31 AM
+ 2.

Ban the pain.

Before banning 71dB first refute him.  (Same in my case.)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 28, 2021, 07:10:53 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on March 28, 2021, 07:00:53 AM
Do you deny what I've said? 

No. Especially as I know of no country which was not initially designed as, or did not eventually turned into, an oligarchy.

Quote
Unfortunately history is glossed in public schools in most countries.

That's exactly why I asked the question in the first place.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 28, 2021, 07:30:00 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on March 28, 2021, 07:02:58 AM
Ban the pain.

Before banning 71dB first refute him.  (Same in my case.)

Whoever suggested, let alone demanded, that 71db, or you for that matter, be banned? Certainly not I (heck, only recently I had a humorous and civil exchange with him right here), nor ritter nor greg nor Karl nor JBS nor Todd nor anyone else that I can think of who at some point or another disagreed strongly with him. I am opposed to banning people in principle, save in the worst cases of unrepentant bad and uncivil behaviour, or trolling, which is not even remotely the case for 71dB or you. On the contrary, I'm a free-speech extremist.  :D

What ritter implies, and I agree, is that 71dB has been repeating fo years, day in, day out, over and over again, the same things concerning the USA, some of which are blatantly anti-American and which, as SimonNZ (with whom I'm mostly in complete disagreement) correctly noted, if applied to any other country and nation would be qualified as racist. He also repeatedly said he won't do it again, yet here he is at it --- again.

For the record, I think 71dB is a nice guy --- actually, I think the same about every currently active GMGer, including you --- and I'm sure that if we met face to face we'd get along quite fine as long we wouldn't discuss politics, especially USA politics --- actually, I think the same about many currently active GMGers, including you.  :)

Peace and love, brother!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 28, 2021, 07:38:40 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on March 28, 2021, 07:00:53 AM
What do they teach in Romania?

During  most of my school years (1979-1989; I finished high school in 1991) they taught very little about the USA and very much about the glorious Romanian history, from Decebalus and Burebista to Ceaușescu. Needless to say, the only period of Romanian history constantly denigrated was 1866 - 1948, ie the so-called bourgeois-landowner regime, actually the most liberal, constitutional and relatively democratic period of our history before 1989.

Nowadays I really don't know what they teach. Ask me again in 3 years, when my son will go 5th grader and start the study of history.  :D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 28, 2021, 09:20:57 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on March 28, 2021, 04:41:51 AM
So painfully obvious but many (most?) Americans are oblivious to this common sense.  In Canada too we pay more tax but pay zero premiums for essential medical care.

I was amazed when a middle-aged American, (a poster on another forum), bragged that he paid "only" $13,000 for health insurance for his wife and himself.  I imagine they pay some income tax too.

$13,000 is brutal unless your income level is really high. It's also crazy how little the insurance companies cover when something happens. Despite of paying this much for premiums there are tons of out of pocket expenses and if the doctor happens to be out of network you are screwed. It is an insane system. Most Americans know it, but the politicians are too corrupt to do anything about it.

Anyway, when you have gotten used to something it is difficult to imagine alternatives.

Quote from: Fëanor on March 28, 2021, 04:59:53 AM
Many Americans failed to realize that their system was designed as an oligarchy from the start.  Most "found fathers", (where were the mothers but then we mustn't be anachronistic), were members of the elite of landowners and merchants and were explicitly fearful of the ordinary small-hold farmers and workers.  They designed the Constitution accordingly.

Countries can evolve with time. No need to practice 18th century politics forever. The US constitution might "allow" oligarchy, but what the country is is what people do. The US wasn't this oligarchic in the 50's for example. The middle class was very strong. Without the "Buckley v. Valeo" -type of "money = speech" rulings The US would be less oligarchic today.

Quote from: Fëanor on March 28, 2021, 04:59:53 AMAlso these elites who comprised the "founding fathers" were fearful of "central government" and sought to limit its power.  Part of it was that the only example of central government before them was the (irrelevant by then) British Parliament.  But more critical to understand was that the American colonies had be founded and evolved separately from each other and, (not withstanding British appointed governors in some cases), were largely managed by the oligarchic elites who contributed the FF.  Simply put, they were jealous of their local oligarchic control and didn't what to surrender much to a federal government.

This stuff is rarely taught in US publics schools.

You mean never?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 28, 2021, 09:25:57 AM
Quote from: drogulus on March 28, 2021, 06:58:33 AM
    It's more important that good things are paid for than the exact architecture of the payment system. If you have a large poor class resources will be underutilized in a country that has the resources to use. Whole schools of economists are growed up to argue that the poor must stay that way because using all of our stuff will cause money to run out. The arguments make no sense since money systems aren't designed to run out at a nominal end point.

     Uh oh, starting tomorrow dollars won't spend!

Actually the exact architecture of the payment system can affect incentives, so it does matter.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 28, 2021, 09:40:23 AM
Quote from: Florestan on March 28, 2021, 07:30:00 AM
What ritter implies, and I agree, is that 71dB has been repeating fo years, day in, day out, over and over again, the same things concerning the USA, some of which are blatantly anti-American and which, as SimonNZ (with whom I'm mostly in complete disagreement) correctly noted, if applied to any other country and nation would be qualified as racist. He also repeatedly said he won't do it again, yet here he is at it --- again.

For the thousand time: I am NOT anti-American! I am anti-oligarchy, anti-corruption, anti-crony capitalism etc. I am against those things in every country they run wild, but because I don't really know about politics outside my own country Finland (where those things don't really exist) and the US , I don't make ignorant claims about corruption in Sudan or Romania. It makes more sense to call me anti-Sudanian or anti-Romanian, because I haven't had the interest to follow the politics in those countries.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 28, 2021, 09:47:50 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 28, 2021, 09:25:57 AM
Actually the exact architecture of the payment system can affect incentives, so it does matter.

     You have to allow people to buy the output. How it's done is less important than doing it. A large poor class is a wasteful extravagance.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 28, 2021, 09:54:15 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 28, 2021, 09:40:23 AM
I am anti-oligarchy, anti-corruption, anti-crony capitalism etc. I am against those things in every country they run wild, but because I don't really know about politics outside my own country Finland (where those things don't really exist)

Re:oligarchy --- Do you mean that those who comprise the Finnish government and parliament have not been mostly the same people from the same parties for years, if not decades? If you take the Finnish political class as a whole, what percentage of the Finnish population would they make?

Re: corruption --- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_in_Finland (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_in_Finland)

Re: crony capitalism --- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia#Controversies (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia#Controversies)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on March 28, 2021, 09:57:09 AM
Quote from: Florestan on March 28, 2021, 07:38:40 AM
During  most of my school years (1979-1989; I finished high school in 1991) they taught very little about the USA and very much about the glorious Romanian history, from Decebalus and Burebista to Ceaușescu. Needless to say, the only period of Romanian history constantly denigrated was 1866 - 1948, ie the so-called bourgeois-landowner regime, actually the most liberal, constitutional and relatively democratic period of our history before 1989.

Nowadays I really don't know what they teach. Ask me again in 3 years, when my son will go 5th grader and start the study of history.  :D

I suppose it's the proximity of Canada to the USA and the significance to the economy and culture of the latter to the former that means the Canadians are relatively, (I say relatively), well-informed of US history, though in my own case much of it is self-education.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 28, 2021, 10:00:11 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on March 28, 2021, 09:57:09 AM
I suppose it's the proximity of Canada to the USA and the significance to the economy and culture of the latter to the former that means the Canadians are relatively, (I say relatively), well-informed of US history, though in my own case much of it is self-education.

When it comes to history, both Romanian and universal, the same applies to me.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 28, 2021, 10:01:46 AM
Quote from: Florestan on March 28, 2021, 07:30:00 AM
For the record, I think 71dB is a nice guy --- actually, I think the same about every currently active GMGer, including you --- and I'm sure that if we met face to face we'd get along quite fine as long we wouldn't discuss politics, especially USA politics --- actually, I think the same about many currently active GMGers, including you.  :)

Peace and love, brother!

Thanks for these kind words! Yes, I believe I am "nice/trustful", but also a weirdo and lacking social skills. For most people being my friend is an unattractive idea. Instead of relaxed small talk about sports, I give cliquish lectures (the trademark of people with Asperger's) about obscure topics such as the inverse function approximation for the spatial hearing model ITD = r/c * (ɑ + sin ɑ) and just after 10 minutes you'll beg me to change the topic back to US politics.  ;D

Peace! ✌🏽
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 28, 2021, 10:11:50 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 28, 2021, 10:01:46 AM
Thanks for these kind words! Yes, I believe I am "nice/trustful", but also a weirdo and lacking social skills. For most people being my friend is an unattractive idea. Instead of relaxed small talk about sports, I give cliquish lectures (the trademark of people with Asperger's) about obscure topics such as the inverse function approximation for the spatial hearing model ITD = r/c * (ɑ + sin ɑ) and just after 10 minutes you'll beg me to change the topic back to US politics.  ;D

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Quote
Peace! ✌🏽

Rauhaa!  :-*
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 28, 2021, 10:12:10 AM
Quote from: Florestan on March 28, 2021, 09:54:15 AM
Re:oligarchy --- Do you mean that those who comprise the Finnish government and parliament have not been mostly the same people from the same parties for years, if not decades? If you take the Finnish political class as a whole, what percentage of the Finnish population would they make?

Re: corruption --- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_in_Finland (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_in_Finland)

Re: crony capitalism --- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia#Controversies (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia#Controversies)

I don't understand what you mean. What matters is who do these politicians represent. 

"Finland's overall corruption is low, according to public opinion and global standards. The Corruption Perception Index, released by Transparency International in 2021, reported that Finland is the third-most-transparent country in the world."



Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 28, 2021, 10:21:58 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 28, 2021, 10:12:10 AM
I don't understand what you mean.

I mean that in every country there is only a very small fraction of the population which is involved in politics, and an even smaller fraction of people who really matter in politics, ie regular members of government and legislative. It is those very few people who really define and draft agendas and policies --- and that is the very etymological definition of oligarchy: the rule of the few over the many. The common folks choose between them according to what they believe to be their best interest, but they personally have no say whatsoever in the making of those agendas and policies. When was the last time when an important Finnish politician asked you personally about how the country should be run?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 28, 2021, 10:57:19 AM
Quote from: Florestan on March 28, 2021, 10:21:58 AM
I mean that in every country there is only a very small fraction of the population which is involved in politics, and an even smaller fraction of people who really matter in politics, ie regular members of government and legislative. It is those very few people who really define and draft agendas and policies --- and that is the very etymological definition of oligarchy: the rule of the few over the many. The common folks choose between them according to what they believe to be their best interest, but they personally have no say whatsoever in the making of those agendas and policies. When was the last time when an important Finnish politician asked you personally about how the country should be run?

Finland is a representative democracy. In elections people elect 200 representatives to the parliament. The party with most elected representatives forms the government with those parties who are willing to negotiate for the agendas and policies. I believe things are quite similar in other countries with functioning democracy.

Politicians can be approached with email for example, but mostly people just vote for parties and politicians who they believe represent their own  ideas and agendas. I want green/lefty politics done. Most of the time I vote for a green party candidate. My assumption is that the person I vote knows better than I do how green politics shoud be done. So, I don't have a reason to tell them what to do. They are supposed to tell me what they want to do and convince me they know their shit (to earn my trust/vote).

I am not interested of the etymological definition of oligarchy. I am interested of what oligarchy causes in society. In the US because of oligarchy millions of people don't have access to basic healthcare or are in danger of bankruptcy because of  medical bills. That is a very serious consequence of oligarchy (whether the etymological definition is met or not). Whatever tiny amount of corruption is found in Finnish political system, it haven't caused people to not have "nice things." The effects of oligarchy are extraordinarily strong in the US for a "western rich allegedly democratic" country. Even Russia has universal healthcare to my knowledge and it is a clear oligarchy avoid of democracy. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 28, 2021, 11:14:44 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 28, 2021, 10:57:19 AM
I want green/lefty politics done. Most of the time I vote for a green party candidate. My assumption is that the person I vote knows better than I do how green politics shoud be done. So, I don't have a reason to tell them what to do. They are supposed to tell me what they want to do and convince me they know their shit (to earn my trust/vote).

Precisely my point. The difference is that you name it representative democracy, while I name it oligarchy.

The only democracy worth its name is direct democracy --- to which I'm utterly opposed.


Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 28, 2021, 11:25:56 AM
Quote from: Florestan on March 28, 2021, 11:14:44 AM
Precisely my point. The difference is that you name it representative democracy, while I name it oligarchy.

The only democracy worth its name is direct democracy --- to which I'm utterly opposed.

Labels are just labels. If oligarchy gives people "nice things" then it is good. If it doesn't then it is bad. If we call the system in every country an oligarchy then obviously oligarchy can mean very different kind of political outcomes, because we witness different outcomes. That's why I call the US an oligarchy and Finland a representative democracy. Different names for different outcomes. In Finland the politicians actually represent more or less the people who elected them. In the US that's not the case. They represent their donors, mostly the rich and the corporations.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 28, 2021, 11:38:40 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 28, 2021, 11:25:56 AM
If oligarchy gives people "nice things" then it is good. If it doesn't then it is bad.

I agree. But an oligarchy giving people "nice things" is no less an oligarchy than one not giving people "nice things".

Bottom line: either the people (demos) exercise the power (kratos) themselves, or they don't. The hard reality is that they don't, be it USA or Finland or Romania or Spain or whatever country you may think of. There is a whole world of difference between designing policies (ie, what top politicians do) and ratifying them (ie, what ordinary voters do).

Aristotle and Rousseau nailed it: true democracy can be obtained only where the whole amount of people can be completely had in sight from the top of a hill.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 28, 2021, 11:52:50 AM
Quote from: Florestan on March 28, 2021, 11:38:40 AM
I agree. But an oligarchy giving people "nice things" is no less an oligarchy than one not giving people "nice things".

Bottom line: either the people (demos) exercise the power (kratos) themselves, or they don't. The hard reality is that they don't, be it USA or Finland or Romania or Spain or whatever country you may think of. There is a whole world of difference between designing policies (ie, what top politicians do) and ratifying them (ie, what ordinary voters do).

People don't give a shit about definitions and labels. All they care about is having "nice things."

I use my power (kratos) when I cast my vote in elections.  How much more power should/can one individual have? If I alone were able to say how politics is done in Finland then I would be the dictator of Finland.  ;D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 28, 2021, 11:56:42 AM
Quote from: Florestan on March 28, 2021, 11:38:40 AM
Aristotle and Rousseau nailed it: true democracy can be obtained only where the whole amount of people can be completely had in sight from the top of a hill.

Idealistic version of democracy is perhaps impossible, but representative democracy can be made to function so well that the outcomes are almost the same. The most democratic countries in the World prove this.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on March 28, 2021, 12:02:23 PM
I don't have a dog in this fight, but the definitions of oligarchy and democracy bandied about here are rather wilfully iffy.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 28, 2021, 12:02:28 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 28, 2021, 11:56:42 AM
representative democracy can be made to function so well that the outcomes are almost the same.

I doubt it. Turkey and Finland are both representative democracies. The outcomes are drastically different.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 28, 2021, 12:08:02 PM
Quote from: Florestan on March 28, 2021, 12:02:28 PM
I doubt it. Turkey and Finland are both representative democracies. The outcomes are drastically different.

Yes, because Turkey is a caricature of representative democracy. Hence drastically different outcomes.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 28, 2021, 12:11:14 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 28, 2021, 12:08:02 PM
Turkey is a caricature of representative democracy.

Caricature, really? Why? In Turkish elections Turkish people elect a certain number of representatives to the parliament. The party with most elected representatives forms the government with those parties who are willing to negotiate for the agendas and policies. How is this any different from Finland?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 28, 2021, 01:00:18 PM
Quote from: Florestan on March 28, 2021, 12:11:14 PM
Caricature, really? Why? In Turkish elections Turkish people elect a certain number of representatives to the parliament. The party with most elected representatives forms the government with those parties who are willing to negotiate for the agendas and policies. How is this any different from Finland?

Sorry, if I start to lose my interest in this discussion. It's getting silly. My knowledge of Turkish politics isn't on the level to properly analyse this question. Finland is part of EU. Turkey is not considered democratic enough to join EU. The representative democracy just works worse in Turkey. Why? I don't know. Less political parties? Lower education level on population? Different religion? My expertise is not on the level...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on March 28, 2021, 01:09:16 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 28, 2021, 01:00:18 PM
Sorry, if I start to lose my interest in this discussion. It's getting silly. My knowledge of Turkish politics isn't on the level to properly analyse this question. Finland is part of EU. Turkey is not considered democratic enough to join EU. The representative democracy just works worse in Turkey. Why? I don't know. Less political parties? Lower education level on population? Different religion? My expertise is not on the level...

Florestan is just being obtuse.

Anyone interested can sample some of the top google hits.

The rise and fall of liberal democracy in Turkey: Implications ...www.brookings.edu › research › the-rise-and-fall-of-lib...
Turkey was once a beacon of democratic consolidation in a volatile neighborhood, but its authoritarian turn is straining relations with key partners in the West.

The Fragility of Turkish Democracy - E-International Relationswww.e-ir.info › 2021/01/29 › the-fragility-of-turkish-d...
Jan 29, 2021 — After the failed coup attempt in 2016, Turkish political sphere has been dominated by a series of emergency laws. It can be said that Turkey has ...

Turkish Democracy Can't Die, Because It Never Lived ...foreignpolicy.com › 2019/05/13 › turkish-democracy-c...
May 13, 2019 — The party has not resurrected the military as the arbiter of Turkish politics, but President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is engaged in a familiar pattern of ...

Why did Turkish democracy collapse? A political economy ...journals.sagepub.com › doi › full
by B Esen · Cited by 7 — After decades of multiparty politics, Turkey is no longer a democracy. A theory-upending case, the country has descended into a competitive ...
‎Abstract · ‎Why do democracies break... · ‎How different is the AKP...

The Myth of Turkish Democracy | Council on Foreign Relationswww.cfr.org › blog › myth-turkish-democracy
May 22, 2019 — Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan leaves the voting booth at a polling station in Istanbul, Turkey June 24, 2018. REUTERS/Umit Bektas.

Turkish democracy is still alive | Opinion | DW | 24.06.2019www.dw.com › opinion-turkish-democracy-is-still-alive
Jun 24, 2019 — The Turkish opposition's victory over the ruling party in Istanbul's rerun election is an important victory for democracy. It also sets the stage for a ...

The Outlook for Turkish Democracy: 2023 and Beyond | The ...www.washingtoninstitute.org › policy-analysis › outloo...
Mar 26, 2020 — Over nearly two decades, Turkey's Recep Tayyip Erdogan has managed to strengthen his hold on power despite numerous political ...

Turkish Democracy Is Down But Not Out | Balkan Insightbalkaninsight.com › 2019/08/26 › turkish-democracy-i...
Aug 26, 2019 — Relations between Turkey and the West are clearly going through an extremely delicate phase. Under President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the ...

The West Hoped for Democracy in Turkey. Erdogan Had Other ...www.nytimes.com › 2018/08/18 › business › west-democ...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on March 28, 2021, 01:33:57 PM
It is my understanding that Turkey is really just a fascist regime now.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 28, 2021, 02:29:42 PM
Quote from: Daverz on March 28, 2021, 01:09:16 PM
Florestan is just being obtuse.

That's why I lost my interest.  :-\
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 28, 2021, 03:32:11 PM
For SimonNZ:

New Zealand Law Puts U.S. To ABSOLUTE Shame

https://www.youtube.com/v/YNDS5EJ4ztU

Good job New Zealand!  0:)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on March 28, 2021, 07:24:06 PM
Quote from: Daverz on March 28, 2021, 01:09:16 PM
Florestan is just being obtuse.

Anyone interested can sample some of the top google hits.

I would add "wilfully" to the "obtuse".

He should not be on political threads.

I believe he had a talk with the mods some time ago, but the effect is wearing off...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on March 28, 2021, 07:35:28 PM
Quote from: Florestan on March 28, 2021, 10:21:58 AM
I mean that in every country there is only a very small fraction of the population which is involved in politics, and an even smaller fraction of people who really matter in politics, ie regular members of government and legislative. It is those very few people who really define and draft agendas and policies --- and that is the very etymological definition of oligarchy: the rule of the few over the many. The common folks choose between them according to what they believe to be their best interest, but they personally have no say whatsoever in the making of those agendas and policies. When was the last time when an important Finnish politician asked you personally about how the country should be run?

Robert Michels, "Iron Law of Oligarchy."
Michels studied many mass political parties in Europe, including socialist parties, which were considered to be most democratic and least elitist. But Michels found what you are saying in almost all the parties he examined.

Gaetano Mosca observes that the formal differences in government, ie. republic vs monarchy, democracy vs. tyranny, are superficial. He sees that all the govts are oligarchical and elitist, regardless of gotl form, region, civilization etc.

The scholars called pluralists agree that there are only few powerful people in society. But in representative democracy, ordinary citizens have indirect influence on policy-making by voting and supporting among plural and "competing" power elites, ie. political parries, labor union, chamber of commerce, catholic/protestant organizations, consumer group, etc.

I recommend Irony of Democracy, by Thomas Dye, for your leisure time.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 29, 2021, 02:34:09 AM
Quote from: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on March 28, 2021, 07:35:28 PM
Robert Michels, "Iron Law of Oligarchy."
Michels studied many mass political parties in Europe, including socialist parties, which were considered to be most democratic and least elitist. But Michels found what you are saying in almost all the parties he examined.

Gaetano Mosca observes that the formal differences in government, ie. republic vs monarchy, democracy vs. tyranny, are superficial. He sees that all the govts are oligarchical and elitist, regardless of gotl form, region, civilization etc.

The scholars called pluralists agree that there are only few powerful people in society. But in representative democracy, ordinary citizens have indirect influence on policy-making by voting and supporting among plural and "competing" power elites, ie. political parries, labor union, chamber of commerce, catholic/protestant organizations, consumer group, etc.

I recommend Irony of Democracy, by Thomas Dye, for your leisure time.

That looks interesting, thanks.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 29, 2021, 10:50:53 AM

Quote from: drogulus on March 27, 2021, 04:26:12 PM
     
     I am somewhat perturbed by the notions behind the Biden tax scheme.

     One notion perturbs me, and that's raising the corporate income tax.

     Is It Time to Eliminate Federal Corporate Income Taxes? (http://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/wp_979.pdf)

The authors provide an overview of the true purposes and incidence of corporate taxation and argue that it is inefficient and largely borne by consumers and employees, not shareholders. While the authors would prefer the elimination of the corporate profits tax, they understand the conventional thinking that taxes are necessary to help finance government expenditures—even if they disagree. Accordingly, the authors present alternatives to the corporate tax that shift the burden from consumers and employees to those who benefit the most from corporate success.

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 29, 2021, 11:00:17 AM
Interesting, Ernie.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 29, 2021, 11:29:51 AM
     Biden propose tax increases which are "socialism" and tax cuts which are "welfare".

Child and dependent care. Two separate credits related to children are both part of Biden's tax plan.

The President's plan would expand eligibility for the Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit and allow up to $8,000 in credits for qualified expenses for low- and middle-income working families. The change would increase the credit from a current maximum of $3,000 to $8,000 and provide a ceiling of $16,000 for multiple dependents.

The Child Tax Credit would be made fully refundable and rise from $2,000 to $3,000 per child for children ages 6 to 17, with a larger credit of $3,600 per child allowed for children under age six. President-elect Biden announced that these changes will be included in his economic stimulus package expected to be introduced shortly after the inauguration.


     Biden cuts the taxes of Trumpistan, and not even over my objection! (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/cheesy.gif)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on March 29, 2021, 04:24:01 PM
The Daily Beast have started a new podcast "Fever Dreams" shining a light on what the alt-right Qanan Maga types are currently up to:

https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9yc3MuYWNhc3QuY29tL2ZldmVyLWRyZWFtcw?sa=X&ved=0CAIQ4aUDahcKEwjYwsa63NbvAhUAAAAAHQAAAAAQAg&hl=en-NZ

They also refer often to a new 6-part documentary just started called Q: Into The Storm on Netflix.


They also reminded me of the winkwink Trump gave to Q by saying the magic words "tip top tippy top" at a White House (sorry: "house that doesn't have a name") Easter Egg Roll with the surreal imagery of saying it next to a giant shocked looking bunny. Ah, the memories...

The rest of you can see a giant bunny, right?:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dhgn03mXD-A
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on March 29, 2021, 05:01:50 PM
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-states-where-efforts-to-restrict-voting-are-escalating/
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on March 30, 2021, 06:13:16 AM
Quote from: drogulus on March 29, 2021, 10:50:53 AM
One notion perturbs me, and that's raising the corporate income tax.

     Is It Time to Eliminate Federal Corporate Income Taxes? (http://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/wp_979.pdf)

The authors provide an overview of the true purposes and incidence of corporate taxation and argue that it is inefficient and largely borne by consumers and employees, not shareholders. While the authors would prefer the elimination of the corporate profits tax, they understand the conventional thinking that taxes are necessary to help finance government expenditures—even if they disagree. Accordingly, the authors present alternatives to the corporate tax that shift the burden from consumers and employees to those who benefit the most from corporate success.

IMHO, a better idea would be to attribute corporate profits through to the ultimate individual beneficiaries, then tax it at their individual marginal tax rates.  A problem with this is that the attribution process might have many steps making it administratively cumbersome.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 30, 2021, 09:14:29 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on March 30, 2021, 06:13:16 AM
IMHO, a better idea would be to attribute corporate profits through to the ultimate individual beneficiaries, then tax it at their individual marginal tax rates.  A problem with this is that the attribution process might have many steps making it administratively cumbersome.

     That's what the authors have in mind. That's the basis of their reasoning, that the tax would be less regressive when paid by the beneficiaries. If the corporate tax was eliminated, the tax would fall on those who benefited from the increase in their income. This would not require steps. It would require people filing their income tax returns like they do now.

     I take my tax stuff to Carlton the Tax Wizard. My income from corporations is there, including any cap gains. If there's no corporate income tax my income will be higher. I will pay more tax on higher income.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 30, 2021, 09:49:20 AM
Quote from: drogulus on March 30, 2021, 09:14:29 AM
     That's what the authors have in mind. That's the basis of their reasoning, that the tax would be less regressive when paid by the beneficiaries. If the corporate tax was eliminated, the tax would fall on those who benefited from the increase in their income. This would not require steps. It would require people filing their income tax returns like they do now.

     I take my tax stuff to Carlton the Tax Wizard. My income from corporations is there, including any cap gains. If there's no corporate income tax my income will be higher. I will pay more tax on higher income.

Sensible. No wizardry there.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on March 30, 2021, 11:34:26 AM
Quote from: drogulus on March 30, 2021, 09:14:29 AM
     That's what the authors have in mind. That's the basis of their reasoning, that the tax would be less regressive when paid by the beneficiaries. If the corporate tax was eliminated, the tax would fall on those who benefited from the increase in their income. This would not require steps. It would require people filing their income tax returns like they do now.

     I take my tax stuff to Carlton the Tax Wizard. My income from corporations is there, including any cap gains. If there's no corporate income tax my income will be higher. I will pay more tax on higher income.

What am I missing?  Doesn't your personal income from corporations depend on dividend disbursements?  (I'm not familiar in any detail with US taxation.)  If dividends amount to only a portion of the corporation's profit, wouldn't tax on the rest of profits could be indefinitely postponed in the absence of a corporate tax.

Here in Canada double taxation is much reduced by a 'corporate tax credit' on dividends of Canadian corporations.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on March 31, 2021, 08:29:52 AM
I guess Q got it wrong. To everyone's utter shock and amazement, it seems it's republicans who are doing the sex trafficking! Matt Gaetz is under investigation for it. Hard to believe such an upstanding individual could be involved in such activities.

Here's the NY Times article:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/30/us/politics/matt-gaetz-sex-trafficking-investigation.html


Here's Rachel Maddow's background piece and reading of various sources:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kyfKaM_Z7PE
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 31, 2021, 09:32:36 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on March 30, 2021, 11:34:26 AM
What am I missing?  Doesn't your personal income from corporations depend on dividend disbursements?  (I'm not familiar in any detail with US taxation.)  If dividends amount to only a portion of the corporation's profit, wouldn't tax on the rest of profits could be indefinitely postponed in the absence of a corporate tax.



     I pay capital gains taxes, too. But look, I'm not trying to maximally capture tax dollars. I want to capture (or extinguish, really) those dollars that go to high earners as a way to keep taxes on productive activity low. That means reducing the downward pressure on worker income and upward pressure on consumer prices.

     Ultimately all taxes are on the income of someone. Regressive elements of taxation tend to be inefficient. By lowering too high taxation on low incomes demand is raised, making it rational for businesses to invest and create jobs instead of ballooning their stock price. And if they do that, their stock price will go up anyway, but with positive sum consequences for the economy as a whole.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on March 31, 2021, 09:58:12 AM
Quote from: drogulus on March 31, 2021, 09:32:36 AM
     I pay capital gains taxes, too. But look, I'm not trying to maximally capture tax dollars. I want to capture (or extinguish, really) those dollars that go to high earners as a way to keep taxes on productive activity low. That means reducing the downward pressure on worker income and upward pressure on consumer prices.

     Ultimately all taxes are on the income of someone. Regressive elements of taxation tend to be inefficient. By lowering too high taxation on low incomes demand is raised, making it rational for businesses to invest and create jobs instead of ballooning their stock price. And if they do that, their stock price will go up anyway, but with positive sum consequences for the economy as a whole.

Where I agree completely 'Demand' will benefit from lower income folks paying lower taxes, and that in turn would stimulate business to make productive investments.

(Apart from my still being confused), I'm not sure how eliminating corporate taxes will either help the poor or encourage enterprises to invest productively as a result.  Lower corporate taxes may mean higher dividends but will still go mostly to the wealthy, albeit that they are subject to their higher tax rates.

With no taxes, corporations won't necessarily invest their higher retained earnings productively.  Instead, corporations may save in same way as individuals by buy purchasing existing assets -- but that is not productive investment.  This is the fundamental flaw in "supply-side", a.k.a. "trickle-down" economics that I personally call "Bribe the Rich".
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 31, 2021, 10:42:13 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on March 31, 2021, 09:58:12 AM
(Apart from my still being confused), I'm not sure how eliminating corporate taxes will either help the poor or encourage enterprises to invest productively as a result.  Lower corporate taxes may mean higher dividends but will still go mostly to the wealthy, albeit that they are subject to their higher tax rates.


     Corporations pay tax by keeping wages low and prices high. NY Fed Chairman Beardsly Ruml made the case in 1946:

     The Bad Tax

Taxes on corporation profits have three principal consequences — all of them bad. Briefly, the three bad effects of the corporation income tax are:

    1. The money which is taken from the corporation in taxes must come in one of three ways. It must come from the people, in the higher prices they pay for the things they buy; from the corporation's own employees in wages that are lower than they otherwise would be; or from the corporation's stockholders, in lower rate of return on their investment. No matter from which sources it comes, or in what proportion, this tax is harmful to production, to purchasing power, and to investment.

    2. The tax on corporation profits is a distorting factor in managerial judgment, a factor which is prejudicial to clear engineering and economic analysis of what will be best for the production and distribution of things for use. And, the larger the tax, the greater the distortion.

    3. The corporation income tax is the cause of double taxation. The individual taxpayer is taxed once when his profit is earned by the corporation, and once again when he receives the profit as a dividend. This double taxation makes it more difficult to get people to invest their savings in business than if the profits of business were only taxed once. Furthermore, stockholders with small incomes bear as heavy a burden under the corporation income tax as do stockholders with large incomes.

Quote from: Fëanor on March 31, 2021, 09:58:12 AM

With no taxes, corporations won't necessarily invest their higher retained earnings productively.  Instead, corporations may save in same way as individuals by buy purchasing existing assets -- but that is not productive investment.  This is the fundamental flaw in "supply-side", a.k.a. "trickle-down" economics that I personally call "Bribe the Rich".

     That's right. Worker income trickles back up to the businesses that pay them. Carrots are better than sticks, so anything that benefits their workers (also known as "customers") will keeping a virtuous cycle of wages, jobs and profits rising. If you want to get corporations to invest productively and not passively, cut the workers taxes.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 31, 2021, 12:57:17 PM
Corporations are taxed pretty much everywhere in the World.

If taxing corporations was super-bad, I don't think this was the case.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on March 31, 2021, 01:13:25 PM
Quote from: drogulus on March 31, 2021, 10:42:13 AM
     Corporations pay tax by keeping wages low and prices high. NY Fed Chairman Beardsly Ruml made the case in 1946:

     The Bad Tax

Taxes on corporation profits have three principal consequences — all of them bad. Briefly, the three bad effects of the corporation income tax are:

    1. The money which is taken from the corporation in taxes must come in one of three ways. It must come from the people, in the higher prices they pay for the things they buy; from the corporation's own employees in wages that are lower than they otherwise would be; or from the corporation's stockholders, in lower rate of return on their investment. No matter from which sources it comes, or in what proportion, this tax is harmful to production, to purchasing power, and to investment.

    2. The tax on corporation profits is a distorting factor in managerial judgment, a factor which is prejudicial to clear engineering and economic analysis of what will be best for the production and distribution of things for use. And, the larger the tax, the greater the distortion.

    3. The corporation income tax is the cause of double taxation. The individual taxpayer is taxed once when his profit is earned by the corporation, and once again when he receives the profit as a dividend. This double taxation makes it more difficult to get people to invest their savings in business than if the profits of business were only taxed once. Furthermore, stockholders with small incomes bear as heavy a burden under the corporation income tax as do stockholders with large incomes.

IMO, Beardsly Ruml's thinking is a bit dated.

In the first place (income) taxes are not just like operating expenses.  They are applied after profits are earned.  A business will always have the same incentive to minimize operating expenses and maximize revenues whatever the tax rate;  accordingly managerial decisions are not distorted regarding expenses and revenues.

Business rarely give workers better wages simply because they are earning good profits whether before or after tax.  Workers are primarily paid according to the wage rates determined by supply & demand for labor.  However it's true the unions may be able to bargain for wages or benefit higher that they would otherwise be if the company's after-tax profits are high.

Granted, if different business are taxed differently based the nature of the business or its location this may effect management decisions.

Double taxation can be reduced or eliminated by various devices.  I gave Canada's 'Corporate Tax Credit' as an example.  The argument he makes about small income stockholders is minor because most stockholders are fairly well-off.  But note I've all ready said my preference, if it were practical, would be to attribute corporate profits through to the ultimate individual owners to be taxed at their individual rates.

Quote from: drogulus on March 31, 2021, 10:42:13 AM
     That's right. Worker income trickles back up to the businesses that pay them. Carrots are better than sticks, so anything that benefits their workers (also known as "customers") will keeping a virtuous cycle of wages, jobs and profits rising. If you want to get corporations to invest productively and not passively, cut the workers taxes.

Yes, I agree.  If workers have more disposable income the 'demand' that creates gives businesses the incentive to invest;  if you give businesses money, (thru lower taxes), they do not necessarily have an incentive to invest.  Instead they 'save' which means hoarding cash or speculating in existing assets.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 31, 2021, 02:02:01 PM
Ilhan Omar Reveals Progressives Had NO STRATEGY On $15 Min Wage

https://www.youtube.com/v/URCR9vcIGBI

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on March 31, 2021, 02:56:43 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 31, 2021, 02:02:01 PM
Ilhan Omar Reveals Progressives Had NO STRATEGY On $15 Min Wage

https://www.youtube.com/v/URCR9vcIGBI

It took me about 30 seconds to conclude that this guy is an imbecile.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 31, 2021, 03:11:40 PM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on March 31, 2021, 02:56:43 PM
It took me about 30 seconds to conclude that this guy is an imbecile.

It is not about anyone being an imbecile. It is about the progressives in the Congress not fighting enough and not knowing what they are doing. Politics is about having a strategy and using your leverage. Others who don't agree with you won't give you anything unless you force them to give you something. The progressives haven't been using their leverage the way people who voted for them want them to use. The progressives have been a disappointment.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 31, 2021, 03:19:24 PM
     
Quote from: 71 dB on March 31, 2021, 12:57:17 PM
Corporations are taxed pretty much everywhere in the World.

If taxing corporations was super-bad, I don't think this was the case.

     My concern is the US environment where escaping the tax distorts decisions about business location and has a negative effect on domestic employment.

     Some of the good I aim for could be accomplished by lowering the tax to where businesses have no incentive to relocate. But I have more in mind. Much of the anti-tax energy on the Repub side comes from business lobbies. If there's one thing I dislike more than a bad tax it's regressive taxation, which Repubs love, bless their terrible wasted minds. Ending the corporate tax would be a huge gut punch for them.

Quote from: 71 dB on March 31, 2021, 03:11:40 PM
It is not about anyone being an imbecile. It is about the progressives in the Congress not fighting enough and not knowing what they are doing. Politics is about having a strategy and using your leverage. Others who don't agree with you won't give you anything unless you force them to give you something. The progressives haven't been using their leverage the way people who voted for them want them to use. The progressives have been a disappointment.

     The problem is that the progressives don't have the leverage people who voted for them want them to have.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on March 31, 2021, 03:20:10 PM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on March 31, 2021, 02:56:43 PM
It took me about 30 seconds to conclude that this guy is an imbecile.

From the screenshot I was worried you were calling Mehdi Hasan an imbicile.

But it turns out it's good ol' Kyle. Order is restored.

"Your reason for being there is to be a hardliner, not to accept a watered down plan." Forever demanding the perfect be the enemy of the good. Compromise equals defeat.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 31, 2021, 03:28:18 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on March 31, 2021, 03:20:10 PM
From the screenshot I was worried you were calling Mehdi Hasan an imbicile.

But it turns out it's good ol' Kyle. Order is restored.

"Your reason for being there is to be a hardliner, not to accept a watered down plan." Forever demanding the perfect be the enemy of the good. Compromise equals defeat.

     There's value in doing both IMO, playing the hardliner game to draw enemy fire while the good thing gets got by the moderate sellouts. It helps if the players know how to play their position.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 31, 2021, 03:42:18 PM
Quote from: drogulus on March 31, 2021, 03:19:24 PM
The problem is that the progressives don't have the leverage people who voted for them want them to have.

Whether or not they have that much leverage they could have some leverage if they chose to use it by refusing to vote for must pass bills unless their demands are met.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on March 31, 2021, 03:46:38 PM
Quote from: drogulus on March 31, 2021, 03:28:18 PM
     There's value in doing both IMO, playing the hardliner game to draw enemy fire while the good thing gets got by the moderate sellouts. It helps if the players know how to play their position.

But that doesn't seem to be the game they're playing.

And being able to move the needle to "good" with an eye to a later "better" means you have actual power or influence as a hardliner, sticking to demanding nothing less than an immediate "perfect" means you have a record of never achieving anything and are viewed as toothless or ridiculous (or both) and loose leverage.

Plus these hardliners give Fox etc all the material they need for firing up the right-wing base.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 31, 2021, 03:54:34 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on March 31, 2021, 03:46:38 PM
But that doesn't seem to be the game they're playing.

And being able to move the needle to "good" with an eye to a later "better" means you have actual power or influence as a hardliner, sticking to demanding nothing less than an immediate "perfect" means you have a record of never achieving anything and are viewed as toothless or ridiculous (or both) and loose leverage.

Plus these hardliners give Fox etc all the material they need for firing up the right-wing base.

Fox News calls Biden a socialist. If they call you a socialist anyway, you can as well be one!

Medicare for all have been tried to do in the US for 100 years. When is the time? When is the time for $15 minimum wage? There hasn't been progressive politicies implemented in the US for decades. A lot of people think it is the time. It was the time decades ago! Dems have been incrementalists for decades. It is pandemic. People need relief. Now, not 50 years from now. Even Trump promised more relief than what Dems are giving and you feel (living in New Zealand!!) the left is demanding too much?? What the fuck! You know nothing and call people 1000 times more knowledgeable impeciless. I don't understand you.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on March 31, 2021, 03:59:27 PM
I'm not against what they want. I'm against how they go about getting it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 31, 2021, 04:00:06 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 31, 2021, 03:42:18 PM
Whether or not they have that much leverage they could have some leverage if they chose to use it by refusing to vote for must pass bills unless their demands are met.

     What bugs me about the criticism is that it assumes that the progressives have no insight on how to use the leverage they have. They must be wrong somehow, either wrong in misreading their influence or not really committed to their goals. One or another might be true, but I'm not going to assume on scant evidence that either is the case.

Quote from: SimonNZ on March 31, 2021, 03:46:38 PM
But that doesn't seem to be the game they're playing.

And being able to move the needle to "good" with an eye to a later "better" means you have actual power or influence as a hardliner, sticking to demanding nothing less than an immediate "perfect" means you have a record of never achieving anything and are viewed as toothless or ridiculous (or both) and loose leverage.

Plus these hardliners give Fox etc all the material they need for firing up the right-wing base.

     Yes, you have to live on the razor's edge. Drawing Fox fire away from Comrade Biden is a plus.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 31, 2021, 04:26:01 PM

     I think pressure for an even larger infrastructure bill is a good thing. Thank you, AOC.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on March 31, 2021, 04:31:26 PM
Sounds good to me. But that's not what Kyle is saying in that video. He's saying she should withdraw her support and be against any final "watered down" bill that doesn't meet her target. (mere "incrementalism", apparently)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 31, 2021, 04:32:08 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on March 31, 2021, 03:59:27 PM
I'm not against what they want. I'm against how they go about getting it.

Well, explain to us imbeciles how they should go about getting it?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on March 31, 2021, 05:09:22 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 31, 2021, 04:32:08 PM
Well, explain to us imbeciles how they should go about getting it?

I already told you: stop letting the perfect be the enemy of the good.

And it wasn't me who called Kyle an imbecile - though I'm happy to concur.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on March 31, 2021, 06:02:09 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on March 31, 2021, 05:09:22 PM
I already told you: stop letting the perfect be the enemy of the good.

And it wasn't me who called Kyle an imbecile - though I'm happy to concur.

It is 5 am here and I really need to go and sleep, but there is no perfect nor good in US politics. What the left demands is "bare minimum" really.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on March 31, 2021, 11:18:32 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 31, 2021, 03:11:40 PM
It is not about anyone being an imbecile. It is about the progressives in the Congress not fighting enough and not knowing what they are doing. Politics is about having a strategy and using your leverage.

Provided you have that leverage.

In the USA progressives have very little leverage, and it's not much different in other parts of the 1st world, where neo-liberalism still reigns surpreme.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on March 31, 2021, 11:23:49 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 31, 2021, 12:57:17 PM
Corporations are taxed pretty much everywhere in the World.


Nations and states are competing with each other to get corporations to pick their location.

In order to persuade corporations they offer tax benefits, so much so that some corporations hardly pay any taxes, also because they tend to locate their HQ in tax havens.

So, by and large corporations don't pay the kind of taxes you and I do.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on April 01, 2021, 12:39:29 AM
Quote from: Herman on March 31, 2021, 11:18:32 PM
Provided you have that leverage.

Sometimes you have if your votes are needed for example. 

Quote from: Herman on March 31, 2021, 11:18:32 PMIn the USA progressives have very little leverage, and it's not much different in other parts of the 1st world, where neo-liberalism still reigns surpreme.

Yes, not much leverage. The more important to use it when you have it. I don't know any other 1st world country where neo-liberalism reigns as surpreme as in the US. The US is unique.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on April 01, 2021, 12:43:41 AM
Quote from: Herman on March 31, 2021, 11:23:49 PM
Nations and states are competing with each other to get corporations to pick their location.

In order to persuade corporations they offer tax benefits, so much so that some corporations hardly pay any taxes, also because they tend to locate their HQ in tax havens.

So, by and large corporations don't pay the kind of taxes you and I do.

Usually very large corporations (e.g. Amazon) can avoid taxes. Smaller ones pay taxes. They lack leverage.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on April 01, 2021, 12:46:16 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on March 31, 2021, 03:11:40 PM
It is not about anyone being an imbecile. It is about the progressives in the Congress not fighting enough and not knowing what they are doing. Politics is about having a strategy and using your leverage. Others who don't agree with you won't give you anything unless you force them to give you something. The progressives haven't been using their leverage the way people who voted for them want them to use. The progressives have been a disappointment.

Kyle Kulinski is a know-nothing, do-nothing who sees fit to criticize people who made the enormous effort to run for office, get elected, and work hard to make an actual difference. He's pushing the same idiocy that "if it's not Bernie Sanders it's all the same." It is a rehash of an old line that has often led to disastrous consequences. I knew a similar idiot who used every breath to explain to everyone he knew that Ralph Nader was the messiah and if it made no difference if it's George Bush or Al Gore, if it is not Nader. Nader siphoned enough of the progressive vote from Gore to tip the scales to Bush, which gave us the Dick Cheney foreign policy, the tax cuts for ultra rich, and all the rest of it.

If you want to follow progressive politics you could follow someone like Robert Reich, who is a staunch progressive with degrees from Dartmouth, Oxford and Yale, who has been a Professor at Yale and Brandeis, was the Secretary of Labor, and now teaches at the University of California, Berkeley. He has an solid background in law and economics, and knows how government works from the inside. He has actual knowledge and understanding.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Brahmsian on April 01, 2021, 12:50:26 PM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on April 01, 2021, 12:46:16 PM

If you want to follow progressive politics you could follow someone like Robert Reich, who is a staunch progressive with degrees from Dartmouth, Oxford and Yale, who has been a Professor at Yale and Brandeis, was the Secretary of Labor, and now teaches at the University of California, Berkeley. He has an solid background in law and economics, and knows how government works from the inside. He has actual knowledge and understanding.

One of the truly intelligent ones!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on April 01, 2021, 01:48:17 PM
Quote from: OrchestralNut on April 01, 2021, 12:50:26 PM
One of the truly intelligent ones!

Right up there with Kyle, eh...?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Brahmsian on April 01, 2021, 01:50:55 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 01, 2021, 01:48:17 PM
Right up there with Kyle, eh...?

I'm not familiar with him?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on April 01, 2021, 01:53:48 PM
Quote from: OrchestralNut on April 01, 2021, 01:50:55 PM
I'm not familiar with him?

He's Poju's primary source ....
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on April 01, 2021, 01:59:07 PM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on April 01, 2021, 12:46:16 PM
Kyle Kulinski is a know-nothing,

Based on what? His style makes you think he knows nothing and just runs his mouth? As a matter of fact he is one of the only ones who admits when he doesn't know something.

Quote from: Spotted Horses on April 01, 2021, 12:46:16 PMdo-nothing who sees fit to criticize people who made the enormous effort to run for office, get elected, and work hard to make an actual difference.

He works hard to be one of the most important lefty political commentators so your "do-nothing" claim is rubbish. He is the co-founder of Justice Democrats. He was one of the first people to give publicity for AOC. The platform that got AOC and other Justice Democrats elected was originally written by him. Without Kyle Kulinski AOC might not be in Congress today (difficult to say really). All the enormous efforts to run for office and get elected are wasted if you give in to your enemies without using leverage. These progressives get largely elected because regular working people donate them money and campaign for them. Not fighting for people is letting people down. Kyle Kulinski had a vision for progressives and that vision has not come true. That's why he sees fit to criticize these people. He is one of the masterminds behind them. Imagine yourself in his shoes. He has spoken for years to people to donate and campaign for these progressive candidates so that they can fight for them in Congress. People donates and campaigned and what are people getting in return? M4A? No. $15 living wage? No. $2000 relief checks? No. (only $1400 means tested crap). Of course people (and Kyle Kulinski) are disappointed in the performance of the progressives in Congress. The progressives are good people and mean well. That's not the problem. The problem is none of them is a bold leader who can unite the progressives into a fighting team against Republicans and corporate Dems. Maybe Kshama Sawant is the leader they need? Hard work means nothing in politics if your strategy sucks. People with a good strategy walk over you. There is not even talk about public option! Kyle Kulinski's criticism is to help the progressives to find a strategy and start winning at least some battles and become MEGASTARS of the left.



Quote from: Spotted Horses on April 01, 2021, 12:46:16 PMHe's pushing the same idiocy that "if it's not Bernie Sanders it's all the same."

And he is mostly right. There are more similarities between Biden and Trump than differences. Heck, Trump could have given bigger relief checks to people than Biden did. Foreign policy is same Military industry complex-led pro-war crap (Biden bombed Syria before getting relief for Americans). Biden is tough on China, Bolivia,... it would not be much different under Trump. Sure, there are things that are much better with Biden like the return of the US to international tables.

Quote from: Spotted Horses on April 01, 2021, 12:46:16 PMIt is a rehash of an old line that has often led to disastrous consequences. I knew a similar idiot who used every breath to explain to everyone he knew that Ralph Nader was the messiah and if it made no difference if it's George Bush or Al Gore, if it is not Nader. Nader siphoned enough of the progressive vote from Gore to tip the scales to Bush, which gave us the Dick Cheney foreign policy, the tax cuts for ultra rich, and all the rest of it.

Yeah, but if you don't demand anything in return of your vote, the better candidate can choose to be just an inch better. He/she has your vote anyway, so why bother? Al Gore didn't loose because Nader siphoned votes. He lost, because Republicans stole the election in Florida.

Quote from: Spotted Horses on April 01, 2021, 12:46:16 PMIf you want to follow progressive politics you could follow someone like Robert Reich, who is a staunch progressive with degrees from Dartmouth, Oxford and Yale, who has been a Professor at Yale and Brandeis, was the Secretary of Labor, and now teaches at the University of California, Berkeley. He has an solid background in law and economics, and knows how government works from the inside. He has actual knowledge and understanding.

Thanks for the suggestion! I watched one video. Frankly I don't see substantive difference to Kyle Kulinski. How someone can say the other knows his stuff while the other knows nothing is beyond me. Sure, Robert Reich appears more "academic" in the way he looks (more age, behavior), but I don't care about such superficial things. Neither should you. Kyle Kulinski perhaps has less degrees, but at least he reads what smart people say. A lot of Kyle Kulinski's opinions probably originates from Robert Reich. I wouldn't be surprised at all.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on April 01, 2021, 02:09:40 PM
Quote from: OrchestralNut on April 01, 2021, 01:50:55 PM
I'm not familiar with him?

Frankly if you don't this late date know who Kyle Kulinski is you are seriously living inside MSM bubble, blindfolded.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on April 01, 2021, 05:44:12 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on April 01, 2021, 01:59:07 PM

There are more similarities between Biden and Trump than differences.

ffs...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on April 01, 2021, 05:55:26 PM
Quoting in full:

Court voids Trump campaign's non-disclosure agreement (https://www.politico.com/news/2021/03/30/trump-campaign-non-disclosure-agreement-478648)

"A federal judge ruled Tuesday that a broad non-disclosure agreement that Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign required employees to sign is unenforceable.

U.S. District Court Judge Paul Gardephe's ruling generally steered clear of the constitutional issues presented by such agreements in the context of political campaigns. Instead, the judge — an appointee of President George W. Bush — said the sweeping, boilerplate language the campaign compelled employees to sign was so vague that the agreement was invalid under New York contract law.

"As to the scope of the provision, it is — as a practical matter —unlimited. ... Accordingly, Campaign employees are not free to speak about anything concerning the Campaign," wrote Gardephe. "The non-disclosure provision is thus much broader than what the Campaign asserts is necessary to protect its legitimate interests, and, therefore, is not reasonable."

Gardephe's 36-page decision said a non-disparagement clause in the agreement was similarly flawed.

"The Campaign's past efforts to enforce the non-disclosure and non-disparagement provisions demonstrate that it is not operating in good faith to protect what it has identified as legitimate interests," the judge added. "The evidence before the Court instead demonstrates that the Campaign has repeatedly sought to enforce the non-disclosure and non-disparagement provisions to suppress speech that it finds detrimental to its interests."

Gardephe issued the ruling in a case brought by Jessica Denson, a Hispanic outreach director for Trump in 2016 who accused the campaign of sex discrimination in separate litigation.

At one point, the campaign persuaded an arbitrator to issue a $50,000 award against Denson for violating the agreement, but that award was later overturned.

Denson celebrated the latest ruling, saying it dealt a death blow to a tactic Trump has long wielded to control his image.

"I'm overjoyed," Denson told POLITICO. "This president ... former president spent all four years aspiring to autocracy while claiming that he was champion of freedom and free speech. ... There's many people out there who have seen cases like mine and were terrified to speak out."

For decades, Trump required such secrecy agreements of his personal employees and staff in his companies. When he jumped into the presidential race in 2016, his lawyers continued to demand NDAs that seemed modeled on those he used previously in his personal and business affairs.

The practice continued into Trump's presidency, despite warnings from First Amendment advocates that it was unconstitutional to demand that public employees swear an oath of secrecy. Precisely who at the White House was required to sign such agreements and what they covered remains something of a mystery.

The Justice Department joined in the secrecy drive last year by filing a lawsuit against Stephanie Winston Wolkoff, a former volunteer adviser to first lady Melania Trump, over a tell-all book Winston Wolkoff wrote. Some legal experts questioned the basis for the suit, which was based on an NDA she had signed. Days after President Joe Biden's inauguration, the Justice Department dropped the case.

Denson said she is certain that such agreements helped mute criticism of Trump during his 2016 presidential race and through his four years in office.

"Just the terms of the NDA were wildly restricting and it completely stifled public debate, truthful public debate about the Trump campaign and presidency, so this is a massive victory," the former aide said. "NDAs like this are part of the reason why we ended up with a Donald Trump candidacy and presidency in the first place."

An adviser to the former president expressed disagreement with the ruling and said Trump's attorneys are considering their options.

"We believe the court reached the wrong decision and President Trump's lawyers are examining all potential appeals," said the aide, who asked not to be identified.

Technically, Gardephe's decision applies only to Denson, barring the campaign from enforcing the NDA against her. But her attorneys said Tuesday they think the decision effectively nullifies all the NDAs the Trump campaign has issued.

"The court ruled point by point, almost entirely in our favor," said Denson's New York-based lawyer, David Bowles.

Denson's suit was also backed by Protect Democracy, an advocacy organization which formed in opposition to Trump but bills itself as non-partisan and anti-authoritarian. An attorney with the group, John Langford, said the court ruling transcends Trump and serves as a warning to any campaign considering any similar effort to gag its staffers.

"From our perspective, it's really not about politics," Langford said. "No one should have to give up their free speech rights or swear allegiance to a candidate forever just to get a job with or volunteer on a campaign."

The court decision does not foreclose the use of narrower non-disclosure agreements to protect sensitive campaign information, which the judge said might include polling data and fundraising strategies.

The Trump campaign asked Gardephe to edit the provisions if he found them unenforceable as written, but he declined."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on April 01, 2021, 06:22:15 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on April 01, 2021, 02:09:40 PM
Frankly if you don't this late date know who Kyle Kulinski is you are seriously living inside MSM bubble, blindfolded.

Nope, you're the one in the bubble, friend.  Kyle Kulinski is not the must-know pundit you are fond to imagine.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on April 01, 2021, 06:23:06 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on April 01, 2021, 05:44:12 PM
ffs...

I doubt he'll ever stop wearing his blinders as a badge of pride.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on April 01, 2021, 06:38:09 PM
If A derives his ideas from B, I'd be much more interested in B than A.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on April 01, 2021, 09:33:05 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on April 01, 2021, 01:59:07 PMThanks for the suggestion! I watched one video. Frankly I don't see substantive difference to Kyle Kulinski. How someone can say the other knows his stuff while the other knows nothing is beyond me. Sure, Robert Reich appears more "academic" in the way he looks (more age, behavior), but I don't care about such superficial things. Neither should you. Kyle Kulinski perhaps has less degrees, but at least he reads what smart people say. A lot of Kyle Kulinski's opinions probably originates from Robert Reich. I wouldn't be surprised at all.

When you decide whether to believe information the most important criteria is the reliability of the source and the access the source has to information. Are opinions about Covid-19 coming from a leading virologist or epidemiologist, or is it some dude who watched a bunch of YouTube videos from his parents basement? Is information about monetary policy coming from a Federal Reserve Governor or a Nobel Prize winning economist, or is it some dude who watched a bunch of YouTube videos from his parents basement? Robert Reich was Secretary of Labor of the United States, and was responsible for policy making and legislative initiatives related to labor policy. He is a trained lawyer and economist, and has been a Professor of public policy at several of the most prestigious universities in the U.S. He is a primary source of information about labor policy. Your Kyle has no training in public policy, no involvement in creation of public policy, no source of direct knowledge of public policy except what he sees on YouTube. He is an entertainer, at best, and you have mistaken him for a source of information. He is a sort of boring version of Rush Limbaugh on the left. You should ask yourself why you are so gullible.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on April 01, 2021, 11:41:46 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on April 01, 2021, 12:39:29 AM
I don't know any other 1st world country where neo-liberalism reigns as surpreme as in the US. The US is unique.

UK, Netherlands, and the list goes on.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on April 01, 2021, 11:44:18 PM
Frankly I find it hard to believe that once again a whole chain of posts is again about the merits of this Kyle Kulinsky.

This is like a hamster wheel.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on April 02, 2021, 03:23:58 AM
Kyle Kulinsky? I've heard the name on this forum but nowhere else. Maybe that's why my life feels empty and meaningless.  ::)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on April 02, 2021, 07:03:48 AM
Were a bunch of posts deleted? Or just mine?  ???

I was falling asleep while writing it last night so it's possible it didn't go through.


Quote from: Spotted Horses on April 01, 2021, 09:33:05 PM
When you decide whether to believe information the most important criteria is the reliability of the source and the access the source has to information.
These are just the first two things. The third, and most important, is to check with yourself. If it doesn't match your reality, then you should still question it. Don't blindly believe anything or anyone just because it's trustworthy. People can be wrong or tell half-truths (half the story), even honest people. If it's something that you can't verify, then keep it in the realm of a "maybe, they're trustworthy so it's likely true but i still don't know for sure."


I mean, for example:
QuoteNBC News
Former Israeli space security chief says extraterrestrials exist, and Trump knows about it
Maybe not the best example for my point, but perhaps you can get what I mean by saying someone who works for Israeli space security would be someone who knows about these things, but are we really to believe in aliens because of this?  :P


Also, Kyle can get his information from knowledgeable sources, like Robert Reich. Youtubers don't just listen to other youtubers. So the point you made doesn't really make much sense. Youtube commentators are just an additional layer on top of whatever stories or interviews with knowledgeable people come out. I don't get why people here have such a hard time understanding this.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on April 02, 2021, 08:35:19 AM
Quote from: greg on April 02, 2021, 07:03:48 AM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on April 01, 2021, 09:33:05 PM
When you decide whether to believe information the most important criteria is the reliability of the source and the access the source has to information. ...

These are just the first two things. The third, and most important, is to check with yourself. If it doesn't match your reality, then you should still question it. Don't blindly believe anything or anyone just because it's trustworthy. People can be wrong or tell half-truths (half the story), even honest people. If it's something that you can't verify, then keep it in the realm of a "maybe, they're trustworthy so it's likely true but i still don't know for sure."

"Your reality", yes but reality for far too many people is limited by ignorance, prejudice, mythology, and/or outright fantasy.  Listen to Robert Reich?  Are you kidding me?

You didn't have to be terribly well informed back in 2016 to realized that Trump is a con-man and a malignant narcissist but an awful lot of people voted for him anyway.  You only needed to be slightly better informed to realize that his policies, such as they ere, were not going to "Make America Great Again", nor deliver what he was promising to his supporters.

People believed he because he was telling them what they wanted to hear, while in their realities what he promised seemed plausible.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on April 02, 2021, 08:46:03 AM
Quote from: greg on April 02, 2021, 07:03:48 AM
If it doesn't match your reality, then you should still question it.

People naturally do that anyway.  What they really should strive to do more of is question assertions that DO match their reality.  That is really where our blind spots are.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on April 02, 2021, 08:53:09 AM
Store clerk who testified at Derek Chauvin trial still feels 'guilt' at his death l GMA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyjsGZULxTM

Watch if you want a strong dose of melancholy.  :-\



Quote from: Fëanor on April 02, 2021, 08:35:19 AM
"Your reality", yes but reality for far too many people is limited by ignorance, prejudice, mythology, and/or outright fantasy.
Two things:
1) I'm mostly referring to directly observable information by "one's reality," that should be prioritized over what someone trustworthy is saying or writing (due to the reasons i mentioned).
2) Stupid people probably shouldn't do what I just said, and will inevitably have to become sheeplike followers because they can't put 2 and 2 together to understand reality correctly, so I guess what I just said doesn't quite apply to them. So yes, they will be susceptible to what you are saying.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on April 02, 2021, 12:25:17 PM
Actually, I think the George Floyd story might possibly be a good example of the point I'm making.

At first, the narrative from the MSM, and whatever sources people might find trustworthy, was just that the officer just flat out murdered him in broad daylight because he's racist.

Which seems unbelievably shocking, and things that seem unbelievable should always be questioned...

And as we are learning, there are probably more contributing factors to the case. So yeah, just questioning everything is the way to go.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: André on April 02, 2021, 01:54:26 PM
I don't recall you questioning Trump's policies, statements, flat out lies or anything. And yet you had 4 years' worth  of overabundant material to question...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on April 02, 2021, 02:31:39 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on April 02, 2021, 03:23:58 AM
Kyle Kulinsky? I've heard the name on this forum but nowhere else. Maybe that's why my life feels empty and meaningless.  ::)

I watch a lot of "left" youtube, but Kulinsky almost never shows up in my recommendations, and when he does the thumbnails have never enticed a click through.  My impression is that he's one of the "purity pony" variety, but perhaps I should make sure I'm not misjudging the guy.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on April 02, 2021, 03:31:43 PM

     
Quote from: Daverz on April 02, 2021, 02:31:39 PM
I watch a lot of "left" youtube, but Kulinsky almost never shows up in my recommendations, and when he does the thumbnails have never enticed a click through.  My impression is that he's one of the "purity pony" variety, but perhaps I should make sure I'm not misjudging the guy.

     I've seen enough leftist performance art in my life, thank you.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on April 02, 2021, 06:05:52 PM
Quote from: drogulus on April 02, 2021, 03:31:43 PM
     
     I've seen enough leftist performance art in my life, thank you.

No kidding.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on April 02, 2021, 06:34:43 PM
Quote from: André on April 02, 2021, 01:54:26 PM
I don't recall you questioning Trump's policies, statements, flat out lies or anything. And yet you had 4 years' worth  of overabundant material to question...
I questioned him before he even became president, I always found his personality very off-putting.

This place is overwhelmingly anti-Trump, why would I get into a discussion where everyone agrees with me, as well as the status quo media? You're questioning him, I'm questioning him, we are all in agreement, what fun is that?

And there was at least one time I remember criticizing him (probably more than once), probably people here might remember.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on April 02, 2021, 07:02:24 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 02, 2021, 06:05:52 PM
No kidding.

Well, I don't know that it's all that different from Jennifer Rubin opinion pieces, just with a different ideology.

But don't worry, guys, if I find it's a waste of time I'll go back to my usual diet of rescued farm fox and river otters videos.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on April 02, 2021, 11:30:53 PM
Quote from: greg on April 02, 2021, 06:34:43 PM
I questioned him before he even became president, I always found his personality very off-putting.

This place is overwhelmingly anti-Trump, why would I get into a discussion where everyone agrees with me, as well as the status quo media? You're questioning him, I'm questioning him, we are all in agreement, what fun is that?

And there was at least one time I remember criticizing him (probably more than once), probably people here might remember.

This is a giant revision of the actual record.

You were 100% ready to keep giving Trump the benefit of the doubt in 2020, even as hundreds of thousands of Americans were dying.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on April 03, 2021, 12:18:00 AM
Quote from: greg on April 02, 2021, 12:25:17 PM
Actually, I think the George Floyd story might possibly be a good example of the point I'm making.

At first, the narrative from the MSM, and whatever sources people might find trustworthy, was just that the officer just flat out murdered him in broad daylight because he's racist.

Which seems unbelievably shocking, and things that seem unbelievable should always be questioned...

Only unbelievably shocking if you're unaware of all the other times police officers flat out killed a black dude, because they said they were not sure whether the victim was armed. In the case of Floyd this wasn't even an issue.
BLM is a product of all these shootings. However, in your world, BLM is a bunch of antifa radicals that want to burn down cities, and the Kyle kid from Illinois had a reason to go toi Wisconsin and shoot some folks.

QuoteAnd as we are learning, there are probably more contributing factors to the case. So yeah, just questioning everything is the way to go.

Chauvin's lawyer is desperately trying to make a defense case out of crazy stuff like "bystanders telling the cops to stop killing Floyd made him kill Floyd". It's the usual thing of reading crazy rightwing sources and saying "I guess that makes sense, too".
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on April 03, 2021, 06:30:38 AM
Quote from: greg on April 02, 2021, 12:25:17 PM
Actually, I think the George Floyd story might possibly be a good example of the point I'm making.

At first, the narrative from the MSM, and whatever sources people might find trustworthy, was just that the officer just flat out murdered him in broad daylight because he's racist.

Which seems unbelievably shocking, and things that seem unbelievable should always be questioned...

And as we are learning, there are probably more contributing factors to the case. So yeah, just questioning everything is the way to go.

It's clear the Chauvin killed Floyd.  Rationally what isn't so clear is whether (a) it was a racist act, and/or (b) whether he killed him intentionally.  Personally I haven't heard any evidence that could prove either beyond reasonable doubt.

Assuming the answers are "No", it's obvious that Chauvin used excessive force contrary to police training and Minneapolis police practices.  Personally it sounds like "manslaughter" as the term is typically used.  I believe the state prosecutor has charge him with "unintentional 2nd degree murder":  how that differs from manslaughter I don't know but assuming it's essentially the same, that sounds like a reasonable charge.

He should be found guilty of something and I'm confident he will.  However I hope the jury isn't swayed to insist on intentional murder based on racist motivation -- unless further evidence is forthcoming.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on April 03, 2021, 08:42:06 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on April 03, 2021, 06:30:38 AM
It's clear the Chauvin killed Floyd.  Rationally what isn't so clear is whether (a) it was a racist act, and/or (b) whether he killed him intentionally.  Personally I haven't heard any evidence that could prove either beyond reasonable doubt.

Assuming the answers are "No", it's obvious that Chauvin used excessive force contrary to police training and Minneapolis police practices.  Personally it sounds like "manslaughter" as the term is typically used.  I believe the state prosecutor has charge him with "unintentional 2nd degree murder":  how that differs from manslaughter I don't know but assuming it's essentially the same, that sounds like a reasonable charge.

He should be found guilty of something and I'm confident he will.  However I hope the jury isn't swayed to insist on intentional murder based on racist motivation -- unless further evidence is forthcoming.

He is not being tried for intentional murder. Murder statutes are different in every U.S. state and qualifications are very complicated. Ordinarily first degree murder is pre-meditated. Second degree murder requires the the defendant intended to cause harm without necessarily intending to kill. Manslaughter may be appropriate when the death resulted from negligence rather than malice, or the defendant was provoked. In the state of New York, where I lived for some time, a person can be convicted of second degree murder if the defendant shows "a depraved indifference to human life." I have no doubt that is the case here. Chauvin continued to pin Floyd by the neck while Floyd begged for his life, according to multiple witnesses, and his own body camera. An off duty fireman called 911 on Chauvin and testified she asked to be allowed to check Floyd's vital signs and Chauvin refused. By the time Chauvin took his knee off Floyd's neck the man was dead. He exhibited a depraved indifference to human life, whether or not it was predicated on racism.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on April 03, 2021, 09:04:43 AM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on April 03, 2021, 08:42:06 AM
He {Chauvin} is not being tried for intentional murder {of Floyd}. Murder statutes are different in every U.S. state and qualifications are very complicated. Ordinarily first degree murder is pre-meditated. Second degree murder requires the the defendant intended to cause harm without necessarily intending to kill. Manslaughter may be appropriate when the death resulted from negligence rather than malice, or the defendant was provoked. In the state of New York, where I lived for some time, a person can be convicted of second degree murder if the defendant shows "a depraved indifference to human life." I have no doubt that is the case here. Chauvin continued to pin Floyd by the neck while Floyd begged for his life, according to multiple witnesses, and his own body camera. An off duty fireman called 911 on Chauvin and testified she asked to be allowed to check Floyd's vital signs and Chauvin refused. By the time Chauvin took his knee off Floyd's neck the man was dead. He exhibited a depraved indifference to human life, whether or not it was predicated on racism.

Thank you for your lawyerly explanation.  Based on your explanation of 2nd degree murder, I agreed that Chauvin "exhibited a depraved indifference to human life" and is guilty of the charged.  Demonstrating racist motivation isn't necessary to a conviction, (however it might have been the case).  I'm optimistic that he will be convicted.

You point out that each US state has its own criminal definitions.  Here in Canada there is only one, Federal, criminal law.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on April 03, 2021, 09:16:43 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on April 03, 2021, 09:04:43 AM
Thank you for your lawyerly explanation.  Based on your explanation of 2nd degree murder, I agreed that Chauvin "exhibited a depraved indifference to human life" and is guilty of the charged.  Demonstrating racist motivation isn't necessary to a conviction, (however it might have been the case).  I'm optimistic that he will be convicted.

You point out that each US state has its own criminal definitions.  Here in Canada there is only one, Federal, criminal law.

...although I am no Lawyer, and the trial is not in New York.

I lived in Canada for a year and a half and I was shocked at the conduct of the police. They were humane. In any encounter with the public the default tactic is intimidation. The police in the U.S. kill 5 times as many people as in Canada, per capita. Racism is only part of the problem.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on April 03, 2021, 10:28:03 AM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on April 03, 2021, 09:16:43 AM
...although I am no Lawyer, and the trial is not in New York.

I lived in Canada for a year and a half and I was shocked at the conduct of the police. They were humane. In any encounter with the public the default tactic is intimidation. The police in the U.S. kill 5 times as many people as in Canada, per capita. Racism is only part of the problem.

There's none of that "only the guilty have anything to fear," here.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on April 03, 2021, 03:30:51 PM
Quote from: Herman on April 02, 2021, 11:30:53 PM
This is a giant revision of the actual record.

You were 100% ready to keep giving Trump the benefit of the doubt in 2020, even as hundreds of thousands of Americans were dying.
Giving the benefit of the doubt sometimes, criticizing/questioning other times.
Giving the benefit of the doubt towards Trump sometimes = questioning YOU people, who wouldn't give him the benefit of the doubt EVER.
Also I never gave him 100% the benefit of the doubt.

You people = Trump is 100% racist, no questioning that narrative whatsoever.

Me = he's sure not a saint, but perhaps you are looking into things a bit too much. ("Dog-whistling?" lol)
He may or may not be racist, there is a LOT of grey area there, perhaps he is, but even if so, I think you people are overestimating the extremity of it.


So every instance equals questioning. Just the target is different. That is consistent.



And you don't have to throw in the dying Americans thing, that has nothing to do with what I have ever discussed about Trump.



Quote from: Fëanor on April 03, 2021, 06:30:38 AM
It's clear the Chauvin killed Floyd.  Rationally what isn't so clear is whether (a) it was a racist act, and/or (b) whether he killed him intentionally.  Personally I haven't heard any evidence that could prove either beyond reasonable doubt.
It just seems like both are responsible. A healthy/non drug-taking person probably wouldn't have died in the scenario, but the way Chauvin handled it (regardless if it's following procedures), very likely contributed. Just my guess. But yeah, it's just a mess.




Quote from: Herman on April 03, 2021, 12:18:00 AM
Only unbelievably shocking if you're unaware of all the other times police officers flat out killed a black dude, because they said they were not sure whether the victim was armed. In the case of Floyd this wasn't even an issue.
Can you share with me the stats of how many unarmed black Americans were killed by police each year for the last 5 or so years?

"Shocking" because it was captured on video. That doesn't happen often, everyone found it shocking and that's not a case at all against me in any way, it was shocking enough to provoke protests and riots for months.


Quote from: Herman on April 03, 2021, 12:18:00 AM
BLM is a product of all these shootings. However, in your world, BLM is a bunch of antifa radicals that want to burn down cities, and the Kyle kid from Illinois had a reason to go toi Wisconsin and shoot some folks.
Dude. Can you just tell me once and for all if you are intentionally misrepresenting everything I talk about, or you are just misunderstanding?
Because your track record of this is so vast I can't even count the times you get it wrong.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on April 03, 2021, 04:04:21 PM
Quote from: greg on April 03, 2021, 03:30:51 PM
You people = Trump is 100% racist, no questioning that narrative whatsoever.

"He's not 100% racist" sounds like bargaining to me.



Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on April 03, 2021, 05:02:46 PM
Quote from: greg on April 02, 2021, 12:25:17 PM
Actually, I think the George Floyd story might possibly be a good example of the point I'm making.

At first, the narrative from the MSM, and whatever sources people might find trustworthy, was just that the officer just flat out murdered him in broad daylight because he's racist.

Which seems unbelievably shocking, and things that seem unbelievable should always be questioned...

And as we are learning, there are probably more contributing factors to the case. So yeah, just questioning everything is the way to go.

It wasn't the "narrative of the MSM" it was the footage captured by bystanders - which, in case you forget, you have argued here as being the best source. The "contributing factors", if you want to call them that, come from reports from official bodies and are reported through the MSM, which you have argued are the worst.

My feeling is that you are a consistent apologist for racist speech and actions and you'll accept any avenue that allows some downplaying and sweeping under the rug of obvious racism.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on April 03, 2021, 07:50:54 PM
Quote from: Daverz on April 03, 2021, 04:04:21 PM
"He's not 100% racist" sounds like bargaining to me.
There's a scale for almost everything. I think people tend to overestimate how bad he is in some ways. Remember people saying he is "literally Hitler?"
Given all the information provided over time and thinking about all of the possible doubts, it's hard to say that he is quite as racist as people think.
I know Hitler was racist, no need to question that. But Trump? He gets into some very questionable territory, but for me that just isn't enough to jump on the "literally Hitler" bandwagon.



Quote from: SimonNZ on April 03, 2021, 05:02:46 PM
It wasn't the "narrative of the MSM" it was the footage captured by bystanders - which, in case you forget, you have argued here as being the best source. The "contributing factors", if you want to call them that, come from reports from official bodies and are reported through the MSM, which you have argued are the worst.
Yeah, direct footage is the best source. But they didn't release all of the footage immediately, some of it came out later.
At least that's what I remember- if I'm wrong, correct me.

Nothing is infallible, you can film something in a certain way to fit your point of view. But it's much harder than being a journalist writing whatever he wants according to his political perspective.
That's why police have bodycams now, video is much better than he said/she said.
The narrative of the MSM was that a racist police officer killed a unarmed black man for no reason. Maybe? We'll just see how everything turns out.




Quote from: SimonNZ on April 03, 2021, 05:02:46 PM
My feeling is that you are a consistent apologist for racist speech and actions and you'll accept any avenue that allows some downplaying and sweeping under the rug of obvious racism.
That is one crazy perspective. Asking "was that really racist?" is not being a racism apologist. That's just really messed up to view someone that way.

So with the case of that one time SJWs cancelled a Magic:The Gathering card because it was an orc, and orcs reminded them of black people, if you were confronted with a question of whether that was racist or not, what would you say?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on April 03, 2021, 08:36:39 PM
Quote from: greg on April 03, 2021, 07:50:54 PM

Remember people saying he is "literally Hitler?"


No.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on April 03, 2021, 09:05:03 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on April 03, 2021, 08:36:39 PM
No.
Not here, maybe. But online, for sure.
The sentiment here seems to be not far off. If my perception is wrong about that, that can be discussed. I'm open to different viewpoints on the facts of that.

Maybe if people knew what the enneagram 5w4 is like, they would understand me better, because I think it's a pretty good description. My motivation is not to apologize or make excuses for blatantly racist speech. That would just be bizarre IMO, why would anyone do that?

The type is called "The Iconoclast" for a reason. They want to challenge the status quo, and aren't afraid of going into taboo territory. The status quo here is what I mentioned. I like to challenge stuff like that, it's like the complete opposite of caving into peer pressure. Make people challenge their worldview. Make myself challenge my own worldview, which I have done many times to myself.

Maybe that would help. But it's probably hopeless. When people have an extremely solidified worldview, it's triggering to even question any of it at all.  And instead of trying to understand, only getting personal attacks. :-\
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on April 03, 2021, 09:30:11 PM
I can't say what's happening at some corner of the internet where they don't know the meaning of the word "literally", and I don't know why you'd feel they represented the wider conversation. I'd say try serious journalism, but "it's probably hopeless".

In places more worthwhile they have commented every time Trump and his enablers used a page from the authoritarian playbook and drawn specific parallels in his words and actions to events from the past. And the "othering" and attempted scapegoating of specific non white and non christian groups to solidify with manufactured grievance a nationalist base was blatantly and obviously racist and easily called to mind moments in history including, yes, Germany in the 30s and to refuse to see it one needs - how did you put it? - "an extremely solidified worldview".

I have absolutely no interest in you considering yourself an "iconoclast". Saying that is going to make me take you less seriously, not more.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on April 03, 2021, 11:52:12 PM
Quote from: greg on April 03, 2021, 07:50:54 PM
There's a scale for almost everything. I think people tend to overestimate how bad he is in some ways. Remember people saying he is "literally Hitler?"

Frankly, no. But obviously I don't go to online places you do.
It has never been the standard narrative.
It took the Times years to use the word "lie" in the same sentence as "Trump".

You're probably making this "literally Hitler" thing up.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on April 03, 2021, 11:54:02 PM
Quote from: greg on April 03, 2021, 09:05:03 PM
Maybe if people knew what the enneagram 5w4 is like, they would understand me better, because I think it's a pretty good description.

As ever you're eager to make this about your wonderful psyche.
FYI most people here are adults.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on April 04, 2021, 07:22:42 AM
Quote from: greg on April 03, 2021, 09:05:03 PM
Maybe if people knew what the enneagram 5w4 is like, they would understand me better, because I think it's a pretty good description.

So an online quiz told you that were a philosopher and your reaction is to try to lean into this by acting like a Karen (the exact opposite)?  BTW if you were truly were an iconoclast you would be widely read instead of disparaging of any written form of journalism.

Please Greg you are embarrassing yourself.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on April 04, 2021, 08:13:07 AM
Quote from: DavidW on April 04, 2021, 07:22:42 AM
So an online quiz told you that were a philosopher and your reaction is to try to lean into this by acting like a Karen (the exact opposite)?  BTW if you were truly were an iconoclast you would be widely read instead of disparaging of any written form of journalism.

Please Greg you are embarrassing yourself.
Wtf they are the ones that are being Karens. You weren't reading the thread a long time ago so you don't have any background info on that.

This is a discussion thread, not a circlejerk thread. Raising questions does not equal being a Karen. However, insulting people personally because you don't like them challenging your worldview is being a Karen.

And spoiler, but I wasn't the one who started getting personal. Just not something I would quickly jump to.

Also, have you ever had a discussion with someone and write out your detailed opinion on something for several pages, all the nuances, and the person still summarizes that in a totally incorrect way that suits their narrative? If so, do you really just say nothing about it?


Quote from: Herman on April 03, 2021, 11:54:02 PM
As ever you're eager to make this about your wonderful psyche.
FYI most people here are adults.
Maybe you can take the time to understand another person's point of view for one second? That would help. I don't know how else to explain stuff to someone who won't listen and just repeats the same thing over and over again. And only responds with incorrect negative judgement all the time.


Quote from: Herman on April 03, 2021, 11:52:12 PM
You're probably making this "literally Hitler" thing up.
Uh, yeah, sure.  ::)



Also the whole thing of "apologism" or "making excuses"... seems very circular.
Was person A involved in the murder of person B?
Them: Yes.
Me: I'll question your assumption. Well, let's see. There's various degrees of involvement possible. We can discuss certain things, there is a lot of grey area and nuance involved.
Them: Stop being an apologist and making excuses for the murder helper.

:-X
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on April 04, 2021, 08:24:05 AM
Speaking of Karens, I was just thinking of this one Karen customer I had as a cashier one time.
She said that an item should have been a certain price, that was a hundred dollars less than it was. I walk over to the location with her and show her that actually she is looking at the wrong place for where the item is and I can't give her the item at that price.
Despite showing physical evidence and explaining what is going on, she still gets mad and asks for a manager. And the manager says the same thing as me, and then she says she is going to call corporate to get us in trouble.

I get a similar feeling sometimes talking to certain people here.



edit:
Probably a true good example of a Karen would be someone who complains to the mods about someone because they disagree with them.
It would be a tighter parallel to the most commonly understood definition of a Karen, because Karen's are, at their core, understood to be a person who says "can I speak to the manager?"

btw I haven't ever complained to the mods about anyone posting on the political threads, and have always been in favor of people speaking freely.

But if someone has a different definition of what a Karen is, fine, there's just going to be some misunderstanding then.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on April 05, 2021, 07:33:53 AM
Quote from: greg on April 04, 2021, 08:13:07 AM
You weren't reading the thread a long time ago so you don't have any background info on that.

Fair enough.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on April 05, 2021, 10:08:56 AM
Quote from: DavidW on April 05, 2021, 07:33:53 AM
Fair enough.
You almost gave me a heart attack, people on this thread never acknowledge any point I ever make so not used to that.




Just a thought about this:

Quote from: Daverz on April 03, 2021, 04:04:21 PM
"He's not 100% racist" sounds like bargaining to me.
So why is this viewed as "bargaining?"

Perhaps you haven't considered that I have listened to people's points and think about the likelihood of them.

I'm also not saying he's "0% racist," just saying there's a grey area. Most likely he falls in there. I could also be wrong, he could be 0% or 100% as well.

Perhaps you think I "know" he's 100% racist and just don't want to admit it? This is another example of the circular type thinking. The truth is true, people just don't want to admit it and if they try to compromise or see both sides they are "bargaining." Rather than to bother deconstructing how true it is.

The problem is all points to the mindset of subscribing to identity politics. Soooo many things being viewed as racist threat, even if they aren't. The area size of the possibilities of things being racist is cast soooo wide compared to the normal person that we get cancel culture for stuff like Aunt Jemima.

If everything is being viewed as a threat, people start to get aggressive and create unnecessary conflict, rather than slowing things down and trying to think things through.

So there will be a conflict against normal people who see things as not really a big deal, unless it actually does become a big deal.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on April 05, 2021, 10:40:15 AM
Quote from: greg on April 05, 2021, 10:08:56 AM
You almost gave me a heart attack, people on this thread never acknowledge any point I ever make so not used to that.




Just a thought about this:
So why is this viewed as "bargaining?"

Perhaps you haven't considered that I have listened to people's points and think about the likelihood of them.

I'm also not saying he's "0% racist," just saying there's a grey area. Most likely he falls in there. I could also be wrong, he could be 0% or 100% as well.

Perhaps you think I "know" he's 100% racist and just don't want to admit it? This is another example of the circular type thinking. The truth is true, people just don't want to admit it and if they try to compromise or see both sides they are "bargaining." Rather than to bother deconstructing how true it is.

The problem is all points to the mindset of subscribing to identity politics. Soooo many things being viewed as racist threat, even if they aren't. The area size of the possibilities of things being racist is cast soooo wide compared to the normal person that we get cancel culture for stuff like Aunt Jemima.

If everything is being viewed as a threat, people start to get aggressive and create unnecessary conflict, rather than slowing things down and trying to think things through.

So there will be a conflict against normal people who see things as not really a big deal, unless it actually does become a big deal.

I'm not taking sides here, but I would invite you to consider that racism may not be a 'shades of grey' type of issue; one could fairly postulate that it is a yes or no type of situation. You either are or you aren't. Viewed from that perspective, there is not the slightest doubt in my mind that T***p was a racist. And a few other ists too.

Actually, I'm big on seeing things in shades of grey, but this is a case where I don't see how it applies.

8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on April 05, 2021, 12:05:47 PM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on April 05, 2021, 10:40:15 AM
I'm not taking sides here, but I would invite you to consider that racism may not be a 'shades of grey' type of issue; one could fairly postulate that it is a yes or no type of situation. You either are or you aren't. Viewed from that perspective, there is not the slightest doubt in my mind that T***p was a racist. And a few other ists too.

Actually, I'm big on seeing things in shades of grey, but this is a case where I don't see how it applies.

8)
Gotcha.
I think the difference in perspective can also be caused by language itself. How it's structured can influence how we think.
So might be one reason why progressive love changing language/meanings of words/etc. Depends on what their intent is, I guess, it could be something dark like that but also done in good faith. I'm not certain. Some things seem to be so, some things not.

"Is" and "isn't" is a binary thing. We qualify states of being this way. But I don't think we should let language dictate how we think. (Learning foreign languages or doing creative may help people break out of that).


So... something like psychopathy is measure as a scale, the official one used by psychiatric units/prisons/etc. is the PCL-R.
So there is a sliding scale, the most extreme psychopaths will say yes to all 40 questions (rare), usually more like around 30.  Most people score low.

So likewise, if we invented a racism quiz, we could do the same because we seem to have developed many different things that could point towards racism, so we could devise a similar 40 question checklist.

People are going to have different scores. Most people will score low.


If someone has ever shouted a racist slur and meant it, then that goes against them. If they have committed violence against a minority because they are a minority, that really goes against them. Stuff like that.

Less harmful stuff would be dwelling on negative stereotypes ("X race is not so good at X", etc.) but what if the person that thinks that doesn't think that X race should be eliminated? If they hold that negative stereotype, then are they 100% racist as Hitler?

Some things are worse than others... considering the multitude of things, you can add up the negatives.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on April 05, 2021, 12:23:59 PM
Quote from: greg on April 05, 2021, 12:05:47 PM
So... something like psychopathy is measure as a scale, the official one used by psychiatric units/prisons/etc. is the PCL-R.
So there is a sliding scale, the most extreme psychopaths will say yes to all 40 questions (rare), usually more like around 30.  Most people score low.

So likewise, if we invented a racism quiz, we could do the same because we seem to have developed many different things that could point towards racism, so we could devise a similar 40 question checklist.

People are going to have different scores. Most people will score low.


If someone has ever shouted a racist slur and meant it, then that goes against them. If they have committed violence against a minority because they are a minority, that really goes against them. Stuff like that.

Less harmful stuff would be dwelling on negative stereotypes ("X race is not so good at X", etc.) but what if the person that thinks that doesn't think that X race should be eliminated? If they hold that negative stereotype, then are they 100% racist as Hitler?

Some things are worse than others... considering the multitude of things, you can add up the negatives.

Certainly there are degrees of racism. Let's say ...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on April 05, 2021, 02:26:16 PM
Quote from: greg on April 05, 2021, 12:05:47 PM

If someone has ever shouted a racist slur and meant it, then that goes against them. If they have committed violence against a minority because they are a minority, that really goes against them. Stuff like that.

Less harmful stuff would be dwelling on negative stereotypes ("X race is not so good at X", etc.) but what if the person that thinks that doesn't think that X race should be eliminated? If they hold that negative stereotype, then are they 100% racist as Hitler?

Some things are worse than others... considering the multitude of things, you can add up the negatives.

Its not as simple as that because Trump was The President, not merely your Archie Bunker neighbour, and had the loudest megaphone and most influence of anyone in the land and enabled and encouraged some of the most full om racists in his circle like Stephen Miller and tacitly - no, vocally - gave permission for other racists to be as uncensored as they wanted to be and create the climate of racial intolerance that would fire up others to commit racist acts.

That Trump himself may "only" score 80% racist (and why would you accept anything higher than 0 from a President?) is not meaningfully different from 100% given that it was only the constant pushback from the other side from the Muslim Travel Ban onwards that stopped their worst white suprenist dreams and racial scapegoating become realised, even if Trump was not as passionate about it as Miller, to whom he gave his approval.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on April 05, 2021, 02:28:46 PM
Quote from: Fëanor on April 05, 2021, 12:23:59 PM
Certainly there are degrees of racism. Let's say ...

  • On one extreme, a belief that some race or ethnicity is a virus on the humanity that must be exterminated plus a willingness to act on that or sanction such action.
  • To a vague nostalgia for some actual or imagined monoculture of one's past, (e.g. WASP).

Show me someone who truly believed that version of history in the second part and I'll show you someone who was on the road to the first part.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on April 05, 2021, 02:28:53 PM
Quote from: Fëanor on April 05, 2021, 12:23:59 PM
Certainly there are degrees of racism. Let's say ...

  • On one extreme, a belief that some race or ethnicity is a virus on the humanity that must be exterminated plus a willingness to act on that or sanction such action.
  • To a vague nostalgia for some actual or imagined monoculture of one's past, (e.g. WASP).
Right. There are multiple ways someone can be thought of racist, so those could be two items in a checklist (though IMO the first would have much heavier weight to it).
Alternately, we could just stick to the dictionary definition, but no one does that any more, so this is where we are.


An alternate way to illustrate what I'm thinking of, apart from a test.
Person A: "X Race is all evil and should be killed."
Person B: "X Race has some bad people, and it's a problem. It's probably genetic reasons. I don't think they should be rounded up and killed, but maybe sent to re-education camps or something."
Person C: "X Race has some bad people, and it's a problem. I don't know the reason why. But I don't think they should be killed or mistreated."
Person D: "X Race has bad people, but so does every race. So it's nothing to even think about."
Person E: "X Race is all good and should be worshipped."


Where do you draw the line for what is racist against X Race? People may disagree on this. I'd say that's probably where the grey area is.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on April 05, 2021, 02:33:43 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on April 05, 2021, 02:28:46 PM
Show me someone who truly believed that version of history in the second part and I'll show you someone who was on the road to the first part.
Who you are talking about is obvious.
I'm not convinced this would be an inevitable destiny for the average person, though.
We had one person here that said they started from a racist environment and got out of that way of thinking.
So really depends on the individual. They can get worse or better over time.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on April 05, 2021, 03:49:50 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on April 05, 2021, 02:28:46 PM
Show me someone who truly believed that version of history in the second part and I'll show you someone who was on the road to the first part.

Fortunately, not necessarily.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on April 06, 2021, 07:46:40 AM
In key showdown, U.S. judge tests prosecutors' claims that Proud Boys leaders planned Jan. 6 Capitol breach (https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/legal-issues/proud-boys-detention-hearing/2021/04/05/f2d8db02-92f9-11eb-a74e-1f4cf89fd948_story.html)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on April 06, 2021, 07:52:30 AM
Michael Gerson: "When former Trump trade adviser Peter Navarro claims that Fauci is "the father of the actual virus" or former chief of staff Mark Meadows complains about Fauci's indifference to the (nearly nonexistent) flow of covid across the southern border, the goal is not really to press arguments. It is to create an alternative MAGA reality in which followers are free from the stress of truth — a safe space in which more than half a million people did not die and their leader was not a vicious, incompetent, delusional threat to the health of the nation."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on April 06, 2021, 12:02:45 PM
Anyone here listen to Vaush? He is a political commentator that is somewhat far left (I believe he's either communist or extremely socialist IIRC).

(before anyone says anything, no, I don't get news from him, nor do I think he represents everyone on the left)

He made this one point which is somewhat interesting, it's not really anything new, but he was saying that all truth is derived from power. The reasoning behind this is that "the victors write the history."

Which is totally true (that victors do write the history). But I think the mistake here is that he is confusing availability of information with truth. The truth will exist, have occurred, etc. in physical reality, just because it isn't written down in a book doesn't mean it isn't true.

(probably relates back to the old falling tree in a forest thing, if no one is around, does it make a sound? Funny story- I actually had that as a question on my quiz once in high school and I wrote that it was dumb to think it wouldn't, and my teacher had a (understanding) talk with- it was all cool, just kinda funny).

Any disagreement/agreement on that?  :P
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on April 06, 2021, 12:35:54 PM
Quote from: greg on April 06, 2021, 12:02:45 PM

Which is totally true (that victors do write the history).

No. It isn't. that's both lazy and illiterate.

And if you'd read some actual history books by actual academic historians you'd know that. Even more so if you'd read books on the* doing* of history, the approaches and methodologies, by actual academic historians.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on April 06, 2021, 03:04:14 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on April 06, 2021, 12:35:54 PM
No. It isn't. that's both lazy and illiterate.

And if you'd read some actual history books by actual academic historians you'd know that. Even more so if you'd read books on the* doing* of history, the approaches and methodologies, by actual academic historians.

lazy and illiterate.  None could never hope to find any better descriptors for greg.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on April 06, 2021, 04:34:10 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 06, 2021, 03:04:14 PM
lazy and illiterate.  None could never hope to find any better descriptors for greg.
Well if you are going to have nothing to say except an unprovoked snarky reply, then back at you.


Quote from: SimonNZ on April 06, 2021, 12:35:54 PM
No. It isn't. that's both lazy and illiterate.

And if you'd read some actual history books by actual academic historians you'd know that. Even more so if you'd read books on the* doing* of history, the approaches and methodologies, by actual academic historians.
So where are all of the textbooks written by Native Americans? And all the dead people killed in wars in various countries? "Dead men tell no tales." Are you interpreting what I'm saying correctly?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on April 06, 2021, 04:48:36 PM
Quote from: greg on April 06, 2021, 04:34:10 PM

So where are all of the textbooks written by Native Americans? And all the dead people killed in wars in various countries? "Dead men tell no tales." Are you interpreting what I'm saying correctly?

No. Because that's not what "history is written by the winners" means. And you're revealing you have no idea what the histories of Native Americans or war victims looks like. You seem to be talking about propaganda or white washing, not History. They are antithetical.

Put down the Youtube and pick up a thick book.



Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on April 06, 2021, 05:42:56 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on April 06, 2021, 04:48:36 PM
No. Because that's not what "history is written by the winners" means. And you're revealing you have no idea what the histories of Native Americans or war victims looks like. You seem to be talking about propaganda or white washing, not History. They are antithetical.
You're literally saying what I'm saying but just different words, so you already got my point. I don't see why you needed to disagree in the first place. Our American History books are typically written by descendants of white Americans, at no time were my American History classes called "American Whitewashing."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on April 06, 2021, 07:22:45 PM
That. Is. Not. What. History. Is. Written. By. The. Winners. Means.

I am not saying what you are saying. We are disagreeing.

And you still don't know what "literally" means. Or what is typical of history books.


I'm pretty sure there's more than an element of trolling in your posts, so I'll have nothing more to add.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on April 06, 2021, 08:25:57 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on April 06, 2021, 07:22:45 PM
That. Is. Not. What. History. Is. Written. By. The. Winners. Means.
Then tell me what "it means" (provide source).
Instead of just sitting there insulting me.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on April 07, 2021, 05:37:04 AM

     What have Marxist historians won?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on April 07, 2021, 07:03:44 AM
Quote from: drogulus on April 07, 2021, 05:37:04 AM
     What have Marxist historians won?
They themselves probably haven't went to battle. But they are the offspring of the victors of something.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on April 07, 2021, 08:38:22 AM
Quote from: greg on April 07, 2021, 07:03:44 AM
They themselves probably haven't went to battle. But they are the offspring of the victors of something.

     There are generational trends in history. Boomers rebelled against their parents, and everyone since has rebelled against the Boomers who refuse to shut up and go away.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on April 07, 2021, 09:13:59 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on April 06, 2021, 07:22:45 PM
That. Is. Not. What. History. Is. Written. By. The. Winners. Means.

I am not saying what you are saying. We are disagreeing.

And you still don't know what "literally" means. Or what is typical of history books.


I'm pretty sure there's more than an element of trolling in your posts, so I'll have nothing more to add.



He may just want attention. No wonder he plays up the "Trump is the real victim" canard.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on April 07, 2021, 09:34:10 AM
Quote from: drogulus on April 07, 2021, 08:38:22 AM
     There are generational trends in history. Boomers rebelled against their parents, and everyone since has rebelled against the Boomers who refuse to shut up and go away.
I'm not sure what that has to do with this?



Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 07, 2021, 09:13:59 AM
He may just want attention. No wonder he plays up the "Trump is the real victim" canard.
Do you really believe that?
Someone can't just want to have a (polite) discussion? Is that impossible? Some people here recognize that.

And where did I say "Trump is the real victim?" You're putting words in my mouth.
How do you fail to distinguish between that, and wanting to question the narrative about him?





Quote from: SimonNZ on April 06, 2021, 07:22:45 PM
And you still don't know what "literally" means.
Here in the US it's common to for people, especially younger, to use the word "literally" in cases that's more like "figuratively" (with an exclamation point).
Not that I agree with that, just that it's rubbed off.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on April 07, 2021, 09:45:22 AM
Also, you can stop making the thread about me.

When I try to defend myself by providing some thoughts/background info, I get the complaint from Herman that I'm making it about me.

Yet Herman and others are the ones starting it by use of the ad hominems, making it about me in the first place.

So if you don't want the thread to be about me, stop the ad hominems, stop making it about me.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on April 07, 2021, 11:24:02 AM
Quote from: greg on April 07, 2021, 09:34:10 AM

And where did I say "Trump is the real victim?" You're putting words in my mouth.
How do you fail to distinguish between that, and wanting to question the narrative about him?


sigh...

Perhaps he suspected - as I do - that coming after a discussion of Trump's racism your throwing in the idea of history being written by the victors was yet another way of questioning the reality of that racism.

As though now Biden in power with the MSM unthinkingly doing his every bidding is following this made up narrative of Trump's racism (and every other fault he manifestly had)..

Curiously this victors prerogative of rewriting history is what Trump thought he should and everyone should fall in line with in 2017 re the "mess" he was left with from Obama.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on April 07, 2021, 11:57:04 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on April 07, 2021, 11:24:02 AM
sigh...

Perhaps he suspected - as I do - that coming after a discussion of Trump's racism your throwing in the idea of history being written by the victors was yet another way of questioning the reality of that racism.
Ok gotcha.
I wanted to introduce a different topic, I'm sick of Trump (originally it was someone else who brought him in regards to me), and found an interesting idea that is related to politics and wanted to share.
Didn't want to connect that to him.
It might be a little bit too general of a question, though, for this thread.

If we still had a Chat Thread I would have put it on there (as well as anything else that is more loosely related to politics).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on April 07, 2021, 05:45:01 PM
Quote from: greg on April 07, 2021, 09:45:22 AM
Also, you can stop making the thread about me.

When I try to defend myself by providing some thoughts/background info, I get the complaint from Herman that I'm making it about me.

Yet Herman and others are the ones starting it by use of the ad hominems, making it about me in the first place.

So if you don't want the thread to be about me, stop the ad hominems, stop making it about me.

Quote from: greg on April 03, 2021, 09:05:03 PM
Maybe if people knew what the enneagram 5w4 is like, they would understand me better, because I think it's a pretty good description. My motivation is not to apologize or make excuses for blatantly racist speech. That would just be bizarre IMO, why would anyone do that?

The type is called "The Iconoclast" for a reason. They want to challenge the status quo, and aren't afraid of going into taboo territory. The status quo here is what I mentioned. I like to challenge stuff like that, it's like the complete opposite of caving into peer pressure. Make people challenge their worldview. Make myself challenge my own worldview, which I have done many times to myself.

Maybe that would help. But it's probably hopeless. When people have an extremely solidified worldview, it's triggering to even question any of it at all.  And instead of trying to understand, only getting personal attacks. :-\
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on April 07, 2021, 06:00:54 PM
"readiness to challenge the status quo" doesn't count for much. lazy, illiterate idiots do that cheaply every day.  There's no virtue in saying, "What if the earth is flat?" 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on April 07, 2021, 06:39:56 PM
An anti-Trump ponders the GOP's anti-policy politics
https://thetriad.thebulwark.com/p/red-bull-elon-musk-and-matt-gaetz
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on April 08, 2021, 05:27:30 AM
Quote from: JBS on April 07, 2021, 06:39:56 PM
An anti-Trump ponders the GOP's anti-policy politics
https://thetriad.thebulwark.com/p/red-bull-elon-musk-and-matt-gaetz (https://thetriad.thebulwark.com/p/red-bull-elon-musk-and-matt-gaetz)

Brilliant: But the preponderance of evidence suggests that Republican voters don't care about tangible government outcomes.

They don't care whether or not a border wall is built, or who would have (theoretically) paid for it. They don't care about whether or not the government fails to manage a global pandemic, killing hundreds of thousands of their fellow citizens. They don't care if unemployment is up—or down. They don't care about stimulus checks. Or the national debt.

It's a little bit like—check that—it's exactly like Red Bull.

Consumers don't care who makes Red Bull. They don't even care what's in the can that says "Red Bull." What they care about is the amazing content on the Red Bull YouTube channel.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on April 08, 2021, 06:59:25 AM
Quote from: Herman on April 07, 2021, 05:45:01 PM

You literally aren't saying anything with that. Read the first sentence of the second post you quoted, i am already saying why i am talking about myself, because you are constantly misrepresenting me and was trying to explain where I'm coming from.


Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 07, 2021, 06:00:54 PM
"readiness to challenge the status quo" doesn't count for much. lazy, illiterate idiots do that cheaply every day.  There's no virtue in saying, "What if the earth is flat?" 
Everything can be misused in a way that doesn't count for much. Virtue signaling itself can have no virtue, many times psychopaths with signal to the world how good and righteous they are when deep down they are a piece of shit.
Just one really easy example are pedo priests.

(so yeah, virtue signaling is not my intent at all, interesting that you think it would be though)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on April 09, 2021, 02:56:12 PM
How Trump Steered Supporters Into Unwitting Donations
Online donors were guided into weekly recurring contributions. Demands for refunds spiked. Complaints to banks and credit card companies soared. But the money helped keep Donald Trump's struggling campaign afloat. (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/03/us/politics/trump-donations.html)

"Stacy Blatt was in hospice care last September listening to Rush Limbaugh's dire warnings about how badly Donald J. Trump's campaign needed money when he went online and chipped in everything he could: $500.

It was a big sum for a 63-year-old battling cancer and living in Kansas City on less than $1,000 per month. But that single contribution — federal records show it was his first ever — quickly multiplied. Another $500 was withdrawn the next day, then $500 the next week and every week through mid-October, without his knowledge — until Mr. Blatt's bank account had been depleted and frozen. When his utility and rent payments bounced, he called his brother, Russell, for help.

What the Blatts soon discovered was $3,000 in withdrawals by the Trump campaign in less than 30 days. They called their bank and said they thought they were victims of fraud.

"It felt," Russell said, "like it was a scam."

But what the Blatts believed was duplicity was actually an intentional scheme to boost revenues by the Trump campaign and the for-profit company that processed its online donations, WinRed. Facing a cash crunch and getting badly outspent by the Democrats, the campaign had begun last September to set up recurring donations by default for online donors, for every week until the election.
Contributors had to wade through a fine-print disclaimer and manually uncheck a box to opt out.

As the election neared, the Trump team made that disclaimer increasingly opaque, an investigation by The New York Times showed. It introduced a second prechecked box, known internally as a "money bomb," that doubled a person's contribution. Eventually its solicitations featured lines of text in bold and capital letters that overwhelmed the opt-out language.

The tactic ensnared scores of unsuspecting Trump loyalists — retirees, military veterans, nurses and even experienced political operatives. Soon, banks and credit card companies were inundated with fraud complaints from the president's own supporters about donations they had not intended to make, sometimes for thousands of dollars."[...]
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on April 09, 2021, 06:48:56 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on April 09, 2021, 02:56:12 PM
How Trump Steered Supporters Into Unwitting Donations
Online donors were guided into weekly recurring contributions. Demands for refunds spiked. Complaints to banks and credit card companies soared. But the money helped keep Donald Trump's struggling campaign afloat. (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/03/us/politics/trump-donations.html)

"Stacy Blatt was in hospice care last September listening to Rush Limbaugh's dire warnings about how badly Donald J. Trump's campaign needed money when he went online and chipped in everything he could: $500.

It was a big sum for a 63-year-old battling cancer and living in Kansas City on less than $1,000 per month. But that single contribution — federal records show it was his first ever — quickly multiplied. Another $500 was withdrawn the next day, then $500 the next week and every week through mid-October, without his knowledge — until Mr. Blatt's bank account had been depleted and frozen. When his utility and rent payments bounced, he called his brother, Russell, for help.

What the Blatts soon discovered was $3,000 in withdrawals by the Trump campaign in less than 30 days. They called their bank and said they thought they were victims of fraud.

"It felt," Russell said, "like it was a scam."

But what the Blatts believed was duplicity was actually an intentional scheme to boost revenues by the Trump campaign and the for-profit company that processed its online donations, WinRed. Facing a cash crunch and getting badly outspent by the Democrats, the campaign had begun last September to set up recurring donations by default for online donors, for every week until the election.
Contributors had to wade through a fine-print disclaimer and manually uncheck a box to opt out.

As the election neared, the Trump team made that disclaimer increasingly opaque, an investigation by The New York Times showed. It introduced a second prechecked box, known internally as a "money bomb," that doubled a person's contribution. Eventually its solicitations featured lines of text in bold and capital letters that overwhelmed the opt-out language.

The tactic ensnared scores of unsuspecting Trump loyalists — retirees, military veterans, nurses and even experienced political operatives. Soon, banks and credit card companies were inundated with fraud complaints from the president's own supporters about donations they had not intended to make, sometimes for thousands of dollars."[...]

Especially as then-President, no one could con like Trump.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on April 10, 2021, 04:45:07 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on April 05, 2021, 02:28:46 PM
Show me someone who truly believed that version of history in the second part and I'll show you someone who was on the road to the first part.
I live in Japan where I think something like the second view is pretty common. They (the Japanese people who do feel that way) might even express it in a way they think is innocuous and casual. Plus, they might be right in thinking this is pretty common as it's a pretty typical aspect of ethnic nationalism. Look at what's been going on in India over the last decade, for example. I don't necessarily agree that it's a road to the first view though that danger is there. Nationalism is a false view of reality. But anyway, it may be very common in a lot of places and though noxious, I don't agree it's THE road to genocide. The view is one necessary ingredient though but you need much more to get to view #1.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on April 10, 2021, 09:30:21 AM
Quote from: milk on April 10, 2021, 04:45:07 AM
  I live in Japan where I think something like the second view is pretty common. They (the Japanese people who do feel that way) might even express it in a way they think is innocuous and casual. Plus, they might be right in thinking this is pretty common as it's a pretty typical aspect of ethnic nationalism. Look at what's been going on in India over the last decade, for example. I don't necessarily agree that it's a road to the first view though that danger is there. Nationalism is a false view of reality. But anyway, it may be very common in a lot of places and though noxious, I don't agree it's THE road to genocide. The view is one necessary ingredient though but you need much more to get to view #1.

I was referring specifically to the American experience as a nation of immigrants and the deliberate historical denial of that.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on April 10, 2021, 06:48:42 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on April 10, 2021, 09:30:21 AM
I was referring specifically to the American experience as a nation of immigrants and the deliberate historical denial of that.
How far back does it have to be to be still considered a nation of immigrants?
My ancestors came to the US in the 1800's...
Japanese were also immigrants also (but waaaay back in time) with the Jomon replacing the Yayoi. So quite further back.
Is there an official line to be drawn with that phrase? 500 hundred years or so?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on April 10, 2021, 07:49:04 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on April 10, 2021, 09:30:21 AM
I was referring specifically to the American experience as a nation of immigrants and the deliberate historical denial of that.
Quote from: greg on April 10, 2021, 06:48:42 PM
How far back does it have to be to be still considered a nation of immigrants?
My ancestors came to the US in the 1800's...
Japanese were also immigrants also (but waaaay back in time) with the Jomon replacing the Yayoi. So quite further back.
Is there an official line to be drawn with that phrase? 500 hundred years or so?
I do think the idea of the U.S. is anti-nationalistic. At its best, it's a country based on an idea, not a perceived people. I also think every country needs a rational immigration policy. When Americans slam multiculturalism, I'm not sure exactly what they mean.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on April 10, 2021, 08:42:34 PM
Quote from: milk on April 10, 2021, 07:49:04 PM
At its best, it's a country based on an idea, not a perceived people.
Yeah. It's, in my view, it's very libertarian leaning. Yet people out there who want to control everyone would love it to be an authoritarian, seems very un-American.  :P 


Also, about the "nation of immigrants" phrase (which I've been hearing lately more often), it seems very weird whether or not it's including the descendants of European settlers or African slaves. If it isn't, then, sure, more immigrants are coming here compared to any other country, but it's only about 15% that actually are considered immigrants.

From wikipedia:
Quote
In absolute numbers, the United States has a larger immigrant population than any other country, with 47 million immigrants as of 2015.[2] This represents 19.1% of the 244 million international migrants worldwide, and 14.4% of the U.S. population. Some other countries have larger proportions of immigrants, such as Switzerland with 24.9% and Canada with 21.9%.[3][4]
14.4% seems accurate.

It's weird because, say you have a bunch of high school in a state, and you count the number of goths in each high school.
High School X has 15% of their student body claiming they are goths, which is the highest in the whole state. And then someone calls High School X a "high school of goths," ignoring that nerds are 20% of the high school, jocks are also 20%, etc. Just kind of a weird phrase IMO.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: André on April 11, 2021, 11:56:40 AM
I found this article on corporate tax cuts an interesting read:


https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/09/opinion/trump-corporate-tax-reform.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/09/opinion/trump-corporate-tax-reform.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage)

The gist of it can be summed up by this short paragraph:

 
Quote
« So one way to think about the failure of the Trump tax cut is that it didn't reverse capital flight because the capital flight never happened in the first place. In effect, the U.S. government gave up hundreds of billions of dollars to fix a nonexistent problem . »
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on April 11, 2021, 04:07:02 PM
Quote from: greg on April 10, 2021, 08:42:34 PM
Yeah. It's, in my view, it's very libertarian leaning. Yet people out there who want to control everyone would love it to be an authoritarian, seems very un-American.  :P 


Also, about the "nation of immigrants" phrase (which I've been hearing lately more often), it seems very weird whether or not it's including the descendants of European settlers or African slaves. If it isn't, then, sure, more immigrants are coming here compared to any other country, but it's only about 15% that actually are considered immigrants.

From wikipedia:14.4% seems accurate.

It's weird because, say you have a bunch of high school in a state, and you count the number of goths in each high school.
High School X has 15% of their student body claiming they are goths, which is the highest in the whole state. And then someone calls High School X a "high school of goths," ignoring that nerds are 20% of the high school, jocks are also 20%, etc. Just kind of a weird phrase IMO.

Once again...that's not what the phrase means.

Must we do this every time?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on April 11, 2021, 09:00:20 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on April 11, 2021, 04:07:02 PM
One again...that's not what the phrase means.

Must we do this every time?
I'm asking what the phrase means. What does it mean, exactly? Seems like by itself it doesn't make sense, there must be some alternate meaning to it. Since you just used it, perhaps you would know.

Perhaps it should be "America is a nation of descendants of immigrants" or "America was a nation of immigrants?" That would make more sense.

edit:
...ok, does it actually mean "American is a nation of immigration?" That would make the most sense. Because the past can be more easily included when worded that way... 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on April 12, 2021, 09:20:40 AM
"A Nation of Immigrants" is the title of a book by J. F. Kennedy
- which probably means it was written in cooperation with Arthur M. Schlesinger.

Here's the money quote: "Another way of indicating the importance of immigration to America is to point out that every American who ever lived, with the exception of one group, was either an immigrant himself or a descendant of immigrants."

These things are not hard to find online...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on April 12, 2021, 11:26:28 AM
Quote from: Herman on April 12, 2021, 09:20:40 AM
"A Nation of Immigrants" is the title of a book by J. F. Kennedy
- which probably means it was written in cooperation with Arthur M. Schlesinger.
Cool, thanks.


Quote from: Herman on April 12, 2021, 09:20:40 AM
Here's the money quote: "Another way of indicating the importance of immigration to America is to point out that every American who ever lived, with the exception of one group, was either an immigrant himself or a descendant of immigrants."
Yeah, that makes sense. The phrase is just really shorthand then, for all of that.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on April 15, 2021, 10:55:51 PM
Is it just me and the media I'm reading, or are the US getting back into a even higher random shoot-and-kill mode as covid seems to be on the wane?

There are so many reports of random killings...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on April 16, 2021, 04:53:53 AM
Quote from: Herman on April 15, 2021, 10:55:51 PM
Is it just me and the media I'm reading, or are the US getting back into a even higher random shoot-and-kill mode as covid seems to be on the wane?

There are so many reports of random killings...

No kidding!  We've had two fatal shootings in the small town I live in the course of just two days.  There was a mass shooting in a town a few hours from where I live.  And every few days another mass shooting appears in the headlines.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Stürmisch Bewegt on April 16, 2021, 05:27:50 AM
RE: Shootings in the U.S., there are many factors at play right now, inc. societal stress, but chief among them is the BIG Second Amendment mistake.  Not every human being (inc. many police) has the mental and emotional wherewithal to safely own and handle weaponry of this power (considerably in advance of what our forefathers had when they passed the 2nd Amend.)  To assume that they do is a grievous error that has caused much grief.  America loves her guns, unfortunately, more than it does its citizens if truth be told, and many more people must be sacrificed to the Gun God before its citizens wake up to their dangers.  The NRA has a lot to answer for, IMO; their misleading mantra "Guns don't kill people, people do," carries a lot of weight with both gun owners and legislators.  The truth is that "Guns enable the killing..."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on April 16, 2021, 05:41:48 AM
That is overly simplistic.  There has been a dramatic increase in gun violence in the past decade or so and the second amendment and debate surrounding it has existed for much longer.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Stürmisch Bewegt on April 16, 2021, 06:00:14 AM
Simplistic or simple?  We have always been a violent culture.  We are more so now and the greater availability of guns facilitates it:  well over 393 million of them abroad in the U.S.  I thought the NRA assured us that the greater availability of weapons would actually cut-down on deaths?  Just one more of their lies. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Stürmisch Bewegt on April 16, 2021, 07:27:45 AM
Forget baseball.  This is now America's pastime; one thing about the Gun God, the more he consumes, the hungrier he gets.  (And He grins as more frightened Americans go out and buy more guns, thinking to protect themselves, when those are the very instruments of their execution).

https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/indianapolis-fedex-shooting-04-16-21-intl-hnk/index.html
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Que on April 28, 2021, 11:59:12 PM
As long as the majority of Americans cling to the idea that owning a gun is their god given right that will give them freedom and protection, nothing will ever change.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on April 29, 2021, 12:33:09 AM
Heh. The thread had been two weeks dormant and you chose to give it a nudge.

No one to blame but yourself now.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on April 29, 2021, 12:42:46 AM
Biden gets a lot of mostly good press here in DK, due to the at times surprisingly leftist, social welfare policies, the overall efficiency, and the re-establishing of some of the former foreign policy ties.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Que on April 29, 2021, 12:05:21 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on April 29, 2021, 12:33:09 AM
Heh. The thread had been two weeks dormant and you chose to give it a nudge.

No one to blame but yourself now.

I see.... Just admit you missed it.  8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on April 29, 2021, 03:01:02 PM
Quote from: MusicTurner on April 29, 2021, 12:42:46 AM
Biden gets a lot of mostly good press here in DK, due to the at times surprisingly leftist, social welfare policies, the overall efficiency, and the re-establishing of some of the former foreign policy ties.

     FDR was a conservative Dem in 1932. He wanted to balance the budget. Like Biden he was more a pragmatist than a dogmatist. Both met the circumstances of their time.

     The purpose of money is to throw at problems, not to run out of when it's needed. Sen. Scott tried last night to get the run out meme circulating again. It seemed like something from another era.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on April 30, 2021, 07:15:23 AM
"But all politicians lie!"

"Why is the MSM given Biden a pass?!"

No one imagines that Biden speaks nothing but truth—but WHAT a difference from the pathological liar/disinformer we had before:
"Through April 26, Biden has made 67 false or misleading statements, according to a Washington Post Fact Checker analysis of every speech, interview, tweet or public statement made by the president. That compares to 511 such statements in Trump's first 100 days."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on April 30, 2021, 03:28:57 PM
What are some examples of the sort of statements they are counting as "false or misleading" from Biden?

I'm doubting they could be compared to any 67 of Trumps.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on April 30, 2021, 04:19:44 PM
Washington Post:

The false and misleading claims President Biden made during his first 100 days in office (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/interactive/2021/biden-fact-checker-100-days/)

"After four years of a presidency that swamped Americans with a gusher of false and misleading claims, the Joe Biden era has offered a return to a more typical pattern when it comes to a commander in chief and his relationship with the facts — one that features frequent spin and obfuscation or exaggeration, with the occasional canard.

Among the most notable falsehoods of President Biden's first 100 days in office was his claim — which he made three times — that Georgia's controversial Republican-backed election law had shortened voting hours.

The claim was one of two uttered by Biden to earn the Fact Checker's "Four Pinocchio" rating, reserved for whoppers — the other being his wildly off-base statement, borrowed from the campaign, that federal contracts "awarded directly to foreign companies" rose by 30 percent under President Donald Trump.

More typical for Biden, when he uttered a false statement, was some subtle truth-stretching.

He spun that if Congress passed his infrastructure plan, "the economy" would create 19 million additional jobs; only 2.7 million of those jobs could be attributed to the proposal itself. He asserted that as vice president he helped craft an $800 billion strategy to help Central America; it was $750 million.
Through April 29, his 100th day, Biden has made 78 false or misleading statements, according to a Washington Post Fact Checker analysis of every speech, interview, tweet or public statement made by the president. That compares to 511 such statements in Trump's first 100 days.

In compiling the database of Biden's claims in his first 100 days, The Fact Checker used the same methodology as the Trump database that counted more than 30,000 claims over the course of Trump's presidency. Any statement that would merit at least Two Pinocchios — essentially "half true" — was included. Any claim that was repeated was also included, though unlike Trump, Biden generally does not repeat his false claims if they have been fact-checked as false.

Biden's relatively limited number of falsehoods is a function, at least in part, of the fact that his public appearances consist mostly of prepared texts vetted by his staff. He devotes little time to social media, in contrast to his Twitter-obsessed predecessor, and rarely faces reporters or speaks off the cuff.
His press secretary, Jen Psaki, holds lengthy daily briefings with the media, and Cabinet secretaries also speak on Biden's behalf.

All told, through April 29, according to a count by Factba.se, Biden spoke about 30 percent fewer words than Trump and tweeted 65 percent fewer times. He gave only seven interviews, compared to 22 for Trump, and held only two news conferences, compared to nine for Trump.

Almost 100 of Trump's claims came from tweets; only one of Biden's tweets was deemed false or misleading. Trump made 56 suspect statements at campaign rallies; Biden held only one campaign rally — on his 100th day — where he made one suspect claim.

About one-eighth of Biden's false or misleading claims on the list relate to the Georgia voting law, which Democrats charge is part of a GOP effort to seize on Trump's bogus claims of election fraud to justify the disenfranchisement of minorities.

Biden's claim that the measure shortened voting hours drew sharp criticism from Republicans, who accused Democrats of lying about the bill. In reality, Election Day hours were not changed and the opportunities to cast a ballot in early voting were expanded.

Biden aides never provided an explanation for why Biden made this statement — or why it was even repeated in an official statement issued by the White House.

Biden has also made some other exaggerated claims about the Georgia law, such as calling it "Jim Crow on steroids." He was referring to a system that, before passage of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, systematically denied Black Americans their constitutional right to vote through "literacy tests," poll taxes and other measures. But the law does not put up roadblocks to Black Americans registering to vote.

While Biden exaggerated at times, he often recalibrated his wording in response to news coverage. For instance, he claimed that reporters had said he was "crazy" when he announced a goal of 100 million vaccine shots in 100 days. That was a stretch, as reporters instead had written it was ambitious and potentially difficult. After fact checks appeared, Biden switched to simply saying reporters said the goal was "ambitious."

He pitched his infrastructure plan with a finely tuned claim that "Independent analysis shows that if we pass this plan, the economy will create 19 million jobs." While the analysis, by Moody's Analytics, did make that prediction, it attributed only 2.7 million of those additional jobs to the plan itself; most of the other jobs would have been created anyway, with or without the plan. After a flurry of fact checks, the White House dropped the talking point and simply started saying the plan would create "millions" of jobs.

Biden has said he ignores Trump, but the former president seems to be ever-present at times in Biden's mind — and, on occasion, the current president will use exaggerated rhetoric to draw a contrast.

During a news conference, Biden claimed, without apparent evidence, that children "starved to death" in Mexico under Trump's 2019 policy allowing border officers to return non-Mexican asylum seekers to locations in Mexico as their claims are adjudicated in immigration courts.

When Biden addressed the pandemic, he also pushed the envelope sometimes to favorably contrast himself with Trump. He said, "When I took office three weeks ago, America didn't have a plan or enough supplies to vaccinate most of the country," and that Trump had failed to order enough vaccine doses. In reality, the Trump administration had options in place to buy more vaccines. The Biden team had to fill in the blanks of the plan and it sped up the tempo, but it was wrong to say there was no plan.

At another point, he said: "When I took office 50 days ago, only 8 percent of Americans after months, only 8 percent of those over the age of 65 had gotten their first vaccination. Today, that number is 65 percent." When Biden took office, vaccinations had only been given for about a month, not "months." Moreover, health-care workers, residents of long-term care facilities, front-line essential workers and people 75 and older were in line to be the first to be vaccinated, which is why a relatively small percentage of people over 65 had been vaccinated.
A number of Biden's statements were flubs. For instance, he said Hispanics were the fastest-growing immigrant population, when their rate of growth has been overtaken by that of Asian Americans in the past decade.

Five times, Biden oddly claimed that more Americans had died from the coronavirus than from all of World War I, World War II and the Vietnam War combined (sometimes he added in the Sept. 11 attacks as well). But the number of in-service deaths during World War I, World War II and the Vietnam War combined adds up to about 580,000 deaths, which was more than the covid-19 deaths at the time. The White House initially said the president intended to refer to combat deaths, but that made little sense because then he actually could have said more people have died of covid-19 than in combat during all of America's wars against foreign enemies.

Perhaps the strangest claim made by Biden — which he said twice as president — was that he had "traveled 17,000 miles with" Chinese President Xi Jinping when they were both vice presidents. Biden certainly met with him a lot — but the White House conceded that "traveled with" was not accurate. Moreover, no matter how generously the travel was measured, it never added up to 17,000 miles. How Biden made this calculation — which he also said at least once during the campaign — remains a mystery."


following this they then list all 67 "false or misleading" statements with analysis.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on April 30, 2021, 04:57:20 PM
On one hand, you're right: it scarcely compares to the disgraced former president. On t'other, the fact-checkers are just doing their job without favoritism.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on April 30, 2021, 05:08:43 PM
I'd like to see them put together a contrasting tally of "lies that undermine the institutions of democracy and stoke hatred and division and put a target on the backs of my enemies" to show the true picture.

Rather than the suggestion that Biden is 10% or 20% Trump. This attempted unbiased fairness in criticism is deeply misleading.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on April 30, 2021, 05:18:13 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 30, 2021, 04:57:20 PM
On one hand, you're right: it scarcely compares to the disgraced former president. On t'other, the fact-checkers are just doing their job without favoritism.

"County officials can keep early voting locations open for longer, from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m."   

https://www.factcheck.org/2021/04/factchecking-claims-about-the-georgia-voting-law/

Emphasis mine.  Anyone want to take bets on how that plays out?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on April 30, 2021, 08:38:41 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on April 30, 2021, 05:08:43 PM
Rather than the suggestion that Biden is 10% or 20% Trump. This attempted unbiased fairness in criticism is deeply misleading.

That's not what the text says.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on April 30, 2021, 09:18:14 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 30, 2021, 08:38:41 PM
That's not what the text says.

I know, and I don't mean to sound snapish, I just think that's how it will be spun by Trump apologists who will read little beyond the headline. It will very much be "both sides do it".
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on April 30, 2021, 09:20:03 PM
Whataboutery is all the Trumpkins have.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 03, 2021, 06:52:24 AM

     Why Biden's Plan to Raise Taxes for Rich Investors Isn't Hurting Stocks (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/03/business/tax-increase-stock-market.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage)

In theory, higher taxes on investments like stocks should make them less appealing. But the outlook for economic growth and corporate profits is often a much bigger factor in the decision to buy, sell or hold on to a stock. And in a resilient market — when politicians typically propose them — higher taxes are even less of a deterrent.

     Is this still a theory people believe?

     Most tax increase comes from growth, not rates. My income goes up, my tax goes up. The economy as a whole pays more tax as it earns more money. If the government spends more on programs the income is taxed just like when it spends less.

     Let me do a "in theory". Say you want to expand the economy in the desired direction by solving problems. Problems are in fact the indicators of the direction, or we'd build bridges to nowhere on purpose, or at least not complain when it's done.

     Now, how would it be possible for Biden to spend a quintillion bucks building shit without the tax roaring back? I can't figure out how that could be.

     We should see the tax as a stabilizer that mostly does its thing without fiddling. Shrinksters disparage the idea that the fiscal flows control inflation as though it was a new and dangerous idea that somehow won't work, and not as the way it works now and always has.

     Libraservatives of all stripes are trying to figure out how much we need to tax the economy down before we spend it up. How about no!!! How about we only do rate adjustments if/when we need to, so's we don't prevent the expansion instead of moderating it?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on May 03, 2021, 08:44:08 AM
The perception of "whataboutery" and "pointing out double standards" seems to be in the eye of the beholder. The truth of it is probably not truly knowable unless you are a mind reader.

Seems the difference may be that true "whataboutery" users think they have disproved the point that the other person is saying. But actually they are making a different point, which is the point of double standards.

The eye of beholder part comes into play when one person thinks they know the intentions of the other, thinking they know whether their focus is on a) thinking they disproved the other person by pointing out a double standard, or b) having nothing to say about that (thereby accepting the accusation), but moving on to an accusation of double standards.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
QuoteWhataboutism, also known as whataboutery, is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument.[1][2][3]
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on May 03, 2021, 08:50:18 AM
Quote from: drogulus on May 03, 2021, 06:52:24 AM
     Why Biden's Plan to Raise Taxes for Rich Investors Isn't Hurting Stocks (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/03/business/tax-increase-stock-market.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage)

In theory, higher taxes on investments like stocks should make them less appealing. But the outlook for economic growth and corporate profits is often a much bigger factor in the decision to buy, sell or hold on to a stock. And in a resilient market — when politicians typically propose them — higher taxes are even less of a deterrent.

     Is this still a theory people believe?

     Most tax increase comes from growth, not rates. My income goes up, my tax goes up. The economy as a whole pays more tax as it earns more money. If the government spends more on programs the income is taxed just like when it spends less.

     Let me do a "in theory". Say you want to expand the economy in the desired direction by solving problems. Problems are in fact the indicators of the direction, or we'd build bridges to nowhere on purpose, or at least not complain when it's done.

     Now, how would it be possible for Biden to spend a quintillion bucks building shit without the tax roaring back? I can't figure out how that could be.

     We should see the tax as a stabilizer that mostly does its thing without fiddling. Shrinksters disparage the idea that the fiscal flows control inflation as though it was a new and dangerous idea that somehow won't work, and not as the way it works now and always has.

     Libraservatives of all stripes are trying to figure out how much we need to tax the economy down before we spend it up. How about no!!! How about we only do rate adjustments if/when we need to, so's we don't prevent the expansion instead of moderating it?

... I'll worry about earning more money, from the stock market or wherever, when the tax rate exceeds 100%.

It seems government tax revenues are going up on account of the faster than expected recovery and capital gains from high stock prices.  In any case higher US taxes are long over duee and ought to fall on the top 10% of earners.  35+ years of trickle-down taxation policies combined with stagnating median incomes have proven that trickle down doesn't happen.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 03, 2021, 08:51:35 AM
Quote from: drogulus on May 03, 2021, 06:52:24 AM
     Why Biden's Plan to Raise Taxes for Rich Investors Isn't Hurting Stocks (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/03/business/tax-increase-stock-market.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage)

In theory, higher taxes on investments like stocks should make them less appealing. But the outlook for economic growth and corporate profits is often a much bigger factor in the decision to buy, sell or hold on to a stock. And in a resilient market — when politicians typically propose them — higher taxes are even less of a deterrent.

     Is this still a theory people believe?

     Most tax increase comes from growth, not rates. My income goes up, my tax goes up. The economy as a whole pays more tax as it earns more money. If the government spends more on programs the income is taxed just like when it spends less.

     Let me do a "in theory". Say you want to expand the economy in the desired direction by solving problems. Problems are in fact the indicators of the direction, or we'd build bridges to nowhere on purpose, or at least not complain when it's done.

     Now, how would it be possible for Biden to spend a quintillion bucks building shit without the tax roaring back? I can't figure out how that could be.

     We should see the tax as a stabilizer that mostly does its thing without fiddling. Shrinksters disparage the idea that the fiscal flows control inflation as though it was a new and dangerous idea that somehow won't work, and not as the way it works now and always has.

     Libraservatives of all stripes are trying to figure out how much we need to tax the economy down before we spend it up. How about no!!! How about we only do rate adjustments if/when we need to, so's we don't prevent the expansion instead of moderating it?

Interesting, Ernie.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on May 03, 2021, 08:53:02 AM
Quote from: WikipediaWhataboutism, also known as whataboutery, is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument.

I rhtink it depends on a case by case basis. Had Goering stood up during the Nuernberg trial and told the Soviet prosecutor Tu quoque, he'd have had an irrefutable case. (Actually, he may have just done that, I don't remember). Otoh, if a hardcore Trump supporter said "Biden lies too" he'd have a very weak case.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 03, 2021, 08:53:57 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on May 03, 2021, 08:50:18 AM
... I'll worry about earning more money, from the stock market or wherever, when the tax rate exceeds 100%.

It seems government tax revenues are going up on account of the faster than expected recovery and capital gains from high stock prices.  In any case higher US taxes are long over duee and ought to fall on the top 10% of earners.  35+ years of trickle-down taxation policies combined with stagnating median incomes have proven that trickle down doesn't happen.

Waiting for the trickle isn't as satisfying as watching paint dry, because the paint will dry.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on May 03, 2021, 08:56:53 AM
Quote from: greg on May 03, 2021, 08:44:08 AM
The perception of "whataboutery" and "pointing out double standards" seems to be in the eye of the beholder. The truth of it is probably not truly knowable unless you are a mind reader.

Seems the difference may be that true "whataboutery" users think they have disproved the point that the other person is saying. But actually they are making a different point, which is the point of double standards.

The eye of beholder part comes into play when one person thinks they know the intentions of the other, thinking they know whether their focus is on a) thinking they disproved the other person by pointing out a double standard, or b) having nothing to say about that (thereby accepting the accusation), but moving on to an accusation of double standards.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism

"Whataboutism" about pointing out double standards?  Bullhockey!!  It's about disingenuous deflection, hypocrisy, two harms not making a right, and as Wiki says, it's a logical fallacy
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 03, 2021, 09:00:02 AM
Well, there was the Great Mind at "work," again....
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on May 03, 2021, 09:03:58 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on May 03, 2021, 08:56:53 AM
"Whataboutism" about pointing out double standards?  Bullhockey!!  It's about disingenuous deflection, hypocrisy, two harms not making a right, and as Wiki says, it's a logical fallacy
Yes, hypocrisy is a sort of double standard.

Quotethat attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy
ex. "All Christians should behave a certain way, but I won't." That's being hypocritical, having a double standard for one's self vs. for others.

And in addition to that, accusing someone of whataboutism while not addressing their point is doing the same exact thing the person who is doing the whataboutism is doing- "whatabouting" with a separate point about a logical fallacy (which may be a good accusation), while ignoring their point. So person a is ignoring the point while moving on to accusations of double standards, and person b is igorning the accusation of double standards while accusing person a of whatabouting. So everything may even be correct on both sides, but it's just people moving around constantly without openly conceding/addressing any points.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 03, 2021, 09:07:55 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on May 03, 2021, 08:50:18 AM


In any case higher US taxes are long over duee and ought to fall on the top 10% of earners.  35+ years of trickle-down taxation policies combined with stagnating median incomes have proven that trickle down doesn't happen.

      Why ??? ??? ?

      As Stephanie "The Great" Kelton says Money Doesn't Grow On Rich People.

      To clarify, rich people do have money. What they don't have is "the money". There is no such thing as that.

      Consequently, the best way to raise taxes on the rich is to cut taxes on everyone else. And the best way do that is by spending on all the improvements that raise incomes on the majority of people. The tax is a net phenomenon. If you cut net spending it acts as a tax increase on spenders.

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on May 03, 2021, 09:11:54 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 03, 2021, 09:00:02 AM
Well, there was the Great Mind at "work," again....
You can choose to make this thread a less toxic environment, or you can choose to continue to write sarcastic remarks, it's up to you. I just wrote one post and didn't even say anything personal about anyone. If we can keep our posts that way, it would probably be better.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 03, 2021, 09:40:24 AM

     Do You Live in a Political Bubble? (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/04/30/opinion/politics/bubble-politics.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage)

     Put your address in and find out. My neighborhood is 16% Repub.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on May 03, 2021, 03:34:38 PM
Quote from: drogulus on May 03, 2021, 09:40:24 AM
     Do You Live in a Political Bubble? (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/04/30/opinion/politics/bubble-politics.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage)

     Put your address in and find out. My neighborhood is 16% Repub.

According to this, my neighborhood is 59% Democrats, but is still not diverse enough for NYT.  At best, some of those Republicans have not gotten around to changing their registration, but the rest are certified assholes at this point.  I don't see the value of having more assholes in my neighborhood.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on May 03, 2021, 04:09:27 PM
Quote from: greg on May 03, 2021, 09:03:58 AM


And in addition to that, accusing someone of whataboutism while not addressing their point is doing the same exact thing the person who is doing the whataboutism is doing-

No. Whataboutism is at best disingenuous deflection and is something quite distinct from pointing to examples of hypocrisy. Addressing the points would be indulging the distraction, would be letting the distraction work.  (Though in practice people usually do address the points at least long enough to show why its a false comparison).

Its not "in the eye of the beholder". You've either constructed a logical argument well or you haven't. If not, that's on you.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Stürmisch Bewegt on May 03, 2021, 04:12:55 PM
Thanks, Daverz, I was quite dumbfounded (and encouraged) by the results.  My neighborhood, according to the database, is 66% Democrat, which is news to me.  I thought this a Republican stronghold (the state is red, certainly).  It would seem, then, that I have had the misfortune of mostly meeting (and talking to) pro-Trump Republicans on my and neighboring streets...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on May 03, 2021, 04:34:27 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on May 03, 2021, 04:09:27 PM
No. Whataboutism is at best disingenuous deflection and is something quite distinct from pointing to examples of hypocrisy. Addressing the points would be indulging the distraction, would be letting the distraction work.  (Though in practice people usually do address the points at least long enough to show why its a false comparison).

Its not "in the eye of the beholder". You've either constructed a logical argument well or you haven't. If not, that's on you.
Ok, so basically the definition given by wikia, "the charge of hypocrisy" means that the charge is either incorrect or irrelevant (and that there is no double standard being pointed out)?

Would this be a good example of "whataboutism?"
ex: CCP China saying in response to the US about their Uyghur concentration camps: "Well, you have racial problems in the US, what about you?"

If it is...
First off, it's ridiculous for China to even mention it, of course.
But they are trying to make a point, too. They are saying the US should practice what it preaches with equality, etc.
The problem seems to be more that the general intentions and attitudes are way different. They think whataboutism will let them off the hook, when in reality, the US is trying to live up to these ideals, while China doesn't. And trying to live up to the ideals but not totally getting there isn't hypocrisy, just imperfection.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on May 03, 2021, 04:44:41 PM
A more common example from recent months would be Trump supporters turning discussion of the January 6 insurrection attempt to the BLM protests.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on May 03, 2021, 05:30:36 PM
Quote from: Stürmisch Bewegt on May 03, 2021, 04:12:55 PM
Thanks, Daverz, I was quite dumbfounded (and encouraged) by the results.  My neighborhood, according to the database, is 66% Democrat, which is news to me.  I thought this a Republican stronghold (the state is red, certainly).  It would seem, then, that I have had the misfortune of mostly meeting (and talking to) pro-Trump Republicans on my and neighboring streets...

There are many islands of blue in the red states.

San Diego County used to be heavily Republican.  It's a Navy town, and this was probably the influence of the military and defense industries in their heyday, but the area has diversified a lot.  I had never lived in a blue Congressional district in CA until 2012 after redistricting.  The rural areas are still Republican.  The congressional district just to the east of us went from being represented by Duncan Hunter to Darrell Issa.  They just traded one crook for another.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 04, 2021, 10:23:17 AM

     Treasury secretary suggests Biden plans may require interest rate hikes, spooking investors (https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2021/05/04/treasury-yellen-interest-economy/)

Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said in remarks aired Tuesday that the economy could be at risk of overheating if the Biden administration's spending proposals are approved. She raised the prospect of future interest rate increases, which appeared to cause a sell-off in the stock market.

     Good one, Janet. She knows how the game is played. We can have our market mini-hiccup without a commitment to any shrinkonomic measures.

     In order to act responsibly one has to fend off the shrinksters with a little carefully chosen "responsibility theater". In Fedspeak you talk about "inflation expectations", an insiders term for inflation you don't really expect. It's much easier to expect "expectations" than the thing itself. We've learned that with brutal clarity. It's hard not to notice, so we better get started. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/tongue.gif)

     On Earth, my favorite planet, we might get some inflation if spending goes up as much as Biden wants. It's good to know that inflation tends to be a bottlenecky thing, and that squeezing the whole economy to fight it can do more harm than good. Often it's better to just let the rabbit pass through the snake than raise unemployment to control the effects.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on May 05, 2021, 12:13:08 AM
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/04/opinion/gop-trump-2020-election.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

Even though there is no chance Trump is going to come back to power, accepting and propagating The Big Lie is the sine qua non in the Republican Party. Otherwise you'll get primaried.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 05, 2021, 06:23:09 AM
Quote from: Herman on May 05, 2021, 12:13:08 AM
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/04/opinion/gop-trump-2020-election.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

Even though there is no chance Trump is going to come back to power, accepting and propagating The Big Lie is the sine qua non in the Republican Party. Otherwise you'll get primaried.

     McCarthy is a pathetic weakling who makes Mitch look like Pericles. That said, I can't see the percentage for him in doing anything differently.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 05, 2021, 07:44:24 AM
     Judge Orders Release of DOJ Memo About the Mueller Report's Obstruction Case (https://thebulwark.com/judge-orders-release-of-doj-memo-about-the-mueller-reports-obstruction-case/)

In a 35-page opinion issued on Monday, a federal judge in Washington, D.C. concluded that the Department of Justice under former Attorney General William Barr made blatant misrepresentations to the court about an internal DOJ memorandum relating to Barr's decision to preempt Special Counsel Robert Mueller's report with a summary of Mueller's "principal conclusions." Mueller delivered his report on March 22, 2019, but as the court explained, "the Attorney General did not share it with anyone else." Instead, "before the weekend was over," Barr sent to the chairmen and ranking members of the House and Senate judiciary committees a now-infamous four-page memo. On the basis of that March 24, 2019 memo, President Donald Trump, in the judge's words, "declared himself to have been fully exonerated." Barr then proceeded to delay for three weeks DOJ's release of Mueller's actual report of his investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and possible criminal obstruction of justice by President Trump.

     Barr sought to prevent the release of the OLC memo on the grounds that it concerned internal deliberations. But wait, there's more:

Barr claimed in his March 24 memo that "the Special Counsel's decision to describe the facts of his obstruction investigation without reaching any legal conclusions leaves it to the Attorney General to determine whether the conduct described in the report constitutes a crime." But as the judge noted, Barr had drawn his conclusion from "what he'd hardly had time to skim, much less, study closely." Moreover, "the excised portions [of the Engel memo] belie the notion that it fell to the Attorney General to make a prosecution decision or that any such decision was on the table at any time." Whereas Barr had been "disingenuous," therefore, the DOJ had submitted affidavits to the court that "are so inconsistent with evidence in the record, they are not worthy of credence."

     So, did Barr actually "deliberate" about the ultra-criminality of the Orange Former Guy or not? The judge suggests massive dishonesty on that point, that Barr tried to bury a strong obstruction case he never actually deliberated.  Barr lied about the Mueller case, just as we all thought he did.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on May 05, 2021, 08:03:21 AM
Quote from: drogulus on May 04, 2021, 10:23:17 AM
     Treasury secretary suggests Biden plans may require interest rate hikes, spooking investors (https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2021/05/04/treasury-yellen-interest-economy/)

Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said in remarks aired Tuesday that the economy could be at risk of overheating if the Biden administration's spending proposals are approved. She raised the prospect of future interest rate increases, which appeared to cause a sell-off in the stock market.

     Good one, Janet. She knows how the game is played. We can have our market mini-hiccup without a commitment to any shrinkonomic measures.

     In order to act responsibly one has to fend off the shrinksters with a little carefully chosen "responsibility theater". In Fedspeak you talk about "inflation expectations", an insiders term for inflation you don't really expect. It's much easier to expect "expectations" than the thing itself. We've learned that with brutal clarity. It's hard not to notice, so we better get started. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/tongue.gif)

     On Earth, my favorite planet, we might get some inflation if spending goes up as much as Biden wants. It's good to know that inflation tends to be a bottlenecky thing, and that squeezing the whole economy to fight it can do more harm than good. Often it's better to just let the rabbit pass through the snake than raise unemployment to control the effects.

I know that some economists like Paul Krugman have long advocated for a looser financial policy and a bit more inflation.  I no economist and I don't know the answer.

However too high inflation, whatever the percent may be, will end the era of the almighty USD.  That would mean an end to a the huge capital surplus the USA enjoys -- and what that would mean would that the USA could not longer sustain the huge negative goods & services trade balance it now "enjoys".  I say "enjoys" because it would mean an end to low prices for foreign goods, (e.g. from China), American consumers now enjoy.  (It would be interesting to see China's response to that eventuality.)

Historically rich countries have experienced the opposite, i.e. trade surpluses and capital deficits, (they are always exactly equal and opposite).  An example would be the UK in the 19th century when British investors invested their profits in the USA and other countries.  Can the USA's current, anomalous situation persist forever?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 05, 2021, 08:35:01 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on May 05, 2021, 08:03:21 AM
Can the USA's current, anomalous situation persist forever?

     I don't count forever persistence as anything other than a consequence, not a cause. The US conscripts foreign labor because US productivity is enormous, as is the size of our market. If we stop being buyers the world won't save as many dollars, and they will instead save in another currency, the one used by the biggest market for their products. Bursts of inflation don't change this all that much. We've run a goods and services surplus (current account deficit) for many decades. We won't run out of dollars because the US is the monopoly manufacturer of them. China is not our banker. China banks with us. Of course, they could decide not to sell goods to us because inflation spikes, or because they hate us, or another reason. But then, would that persist?

     I think we should run the economy hot enough for full employment and rising purchasing power. Monopoly market power is a more consistent producer of inflation than excess demand. Pure uncut demand side inflation is not easy to maintain, so by the time the monetarists get around to responding to it all they manage to do is crash the economy, solving the problem by creating a bigger one.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on May 05, 2021, 09:14:22 AM
Quote from: drogulus on May 05, 2021, 08:35:01 AM
     I don't count forever persistence as anything other than a consequence, not a cause. The US conscripts foreign labor because US productivity is enormous, as is the size of our market. If we stop being buyers the world won't save as many dollars, and they will instead save in another currency, the one used by the biggest market for their products. Bursts of inflation don't change this all that much. We've run a goods and services surplus (current account deficit) for many decades. We won't run out of dollars because the US is the monopoly manufacturer of them. China is not our banker. China banks with us. Of course, they could decide not to sell goods to us because inflation spikes, or because they hate us, or another reason. But then, would that persist?

     I think we should run the economy hot enough for full employment and rising purchasing power. Monopoly market power is a more consistent producer of inflation than excess demand. Pure uncut demand side inflation is not easy to maintain, so by the time the monetarists get around to responding to it all they manage to do is crash the economy, solving the problem by creating a bigger one.

Well OK.

"We won't run out of dollars because the US is the monopoly manufacturer of them":  sure, but the problem isn't running out of USDs but having too many of them.

China as striven to keep the Renminbi low vs. the US dollar obviously in order to make it easier to sell US consumers good, (for instance, by buying US Treasuries with their trade surpluses).  They won't refuse to sell you goods but if the USD weakens significantly, US consumers might be much less willing to buy Chinese, (that's aside from tariffs).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 05, 2021, 09:43:33 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on May 05, 2021, 09:14:22 AM
Well OK.

"We won't run out of dollars because the US is the monopoly manufacturer of them":  sure, but the problem isn't running out of USDs but having too many of them.



     All I'm saying is that's easier said than done. Most dollars will tend to spur production until we run out of room. I think inflation theory should be more securely based on when it shows up for real, and less on fantasies about "monetary inflation".
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 05, 2021, 01:54:03 PM
Well, and why did you suppose the disgraced former president planted him in that job?

A Federal Judge Finds That Bill Barr Was a Fixer and Corrupter of Justice (https://www.thedailybeast.com/a-federal-judge-finds-that-bill-barr-was-a-fixer-and-corrupter-of-justice?ref=home)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 05, 2021, 02:27:45 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 05, 2021, 01:54:03 PM
Well, and why did you suppose the disgraced former president planted him in that job?

A Federal Judge Finds That Bill Barr Was a Fixer and Corrupter of Justice (https://www.thedailybeast.com/a-federal-judge-finds-that-bill-barr-was-a-fixer-and-corrupter-of-justice?ref=home)

     I though the story might slip through the cracks. The Former Guy got away with it, we should stop "wallowing in Watergate" blah etc. There'd be consequences for Barr if he had a reputation above "ant in the afterbirth". He'll be fine.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 05, 2021, 05:39:28 PM
Liz Cheney: While embracing or ignoring Trump's statements might seem attractive to some for fundraising and political purposes, that approach will do profound long-term damage to our party and our country. Trump has never expressed remorse or regret for the attack of Jan. 6 and now suggests that our elections, and our legal and constitutional system, cannot be trusted to do the will of the people. This is immensely harmful, especially as we now compete on the world stage against Communist China and its claims that democracy is a failed system.

The GOP is at a turning point. History is watching us. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/05/05/liz-cheney-republican-party-turning-point/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 06, 2021, 06:11:29 AM
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who famously vowed (and failed) to make President Barack Obama a one-term president, now insists: "One hundred percent of my focus is on stopping this new administration."

McConnell's candor is at least refreshing. He does not care about stomping out the coronavirus or strengthening U.S. leadership around the world or securing our democracy. His goals are all about — and only about — holding power. When Republicans refuse to support voting rights or infrastructure spending, remember that this is not about any argument on the merits. This is "100 percent" about "stopping this new administration." (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/05/06/republicans-insist-opposing-popular-things/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 06, 2021, 07:04:28 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 06, 2021, 06:11:29 AM
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who famously vowed (and failed) to make President Barack Obama a one-term president, now insists: "One hundred percent of my focus is on stopping this new administration."

McConnell's candor is at least refreshing. He does not care about stomping out the coronavirus or strengthening U.S. leadership around the world or securing our democracy. His goals are all about — and only about — holding power. When Republicans refuse to support voting rights or infrastructure spending, remember that this is not about any argument on the merits. This is "100 percent" about "stopping this new administration." (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/05/06/republicans-insist-opposing-popular-things/)


     It's called bipartisanship. Mitch wants to force Dems to be bipartisan with each other while he sits back and watches.

     The game is actually fun to watch if you don't care about the consequences. Repubs offer a compromise so paltry it doesn't even contain much of what they "want", Dems respond by lowering their bid, then Repubs vote no anyway. Angry voters punish the Dems because they know Dems are the active ingredient. There's no point in punishing scorpions for stinging, yes? It's what Mitch is for!

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 06, 2021, 07:38:16 AM

     China Is a Paper Dragon (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/05/china-paper-dragon/618778/)

      Frum discusses a book that says things about China.

The book argues that China's economic, financial, technological, and military strength is hugely exaggerated by crude and inaccurate statistics. Meanwhile, U.S. advantages are persistently underestimated. The claim that China will "overtake" the U.S. in any meaningful way is polemical and wrong—and wrong in ways that may mislead Americans into serious self-harming mistakes. Above all, Beckley pleads with readers not to focus on the headline numbers of gross domestic product. China may well surpass the United States as the largest economy on Earth by the 2030s. China was also almost certainly the largest economy on Earth in the 1830s. A big GDP did not make China a superpower then—and it will not make China a superpower now, or so Beckley contends.

     My argument is a little different, but I come to the same conclusion. The builder of yachts for billionaires can get richer without becoming richer than the customers. Chine builds things for us. We'll know China has become really rich when we build things for them and save in Chinese money. I don't think my fictional grandkids will ever have an account at the Chinese central bank.

     The danger is something I call Thucydides Trap 2.0. The first version has the established power fearing the rising one. Version 2.0 has the rising power fearing its rise is almost over so it better act now. The near term danger is greater.

     Biden's Taiwan Policy Is Truly, Deeply Reckless (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/05/opinion/biden-taiwan-china.html)

When it comes to defending Taiwan from a Chinese attack, Washington's official policy is "strategic ambiguity": The United States won't say how it would respond. Nonetheless, the Biden administration has said that America's support for Taiwan is "rock solid," and calls for a more formal commitment to the island's defense are growing. But whether or not the United States officially pledges to come to Taiwan's defense, it is deeply reckless to believe that it can both provoke Beijing by undoing the "one China" compact and deter it with the threat of military force.

It's reckless because deterrence requires power and will, and when it comes to Taiwan, the United States is deficient in both. According to Fareed Zakaria, "The Pentagon has reportedly enacted 18 war games against China over Taiwan, and China has prevailed in every one."


     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on May 06, 2021, 07:49:26 AM
Interesting post, thank you.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on May 06, 2021, 09:29:23 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/05/06/desantis-signs-florida-election-law-while-shutting-out-all-media-but-fox-news.html
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 06, 2021, 09:51:20 AM
     Opposition to Net Neutrality Was Faked, New York Says: Live Updates (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/06/technology/internet-providers-fake-comments-net-neutrality-new-york.html)

Internet service providers funded an effort that yielded millions of fake comments supporting the Federal Communications Commission's repeal of so-called net neutrality rules in 2017, the New York attorney general said on Thursday.

Internet providers, working through a group called Broadband for America, spent $4.2 million on the project, the attorney general said. The effort generated roughly nine million comments to the agency and letters to Congress backing the rollback, almost all of which were signed by people who had never agreed to the use of their names on such comments, according to the investigation. Some of the names had instead been obtained earlier, in other marketing efforts, and were then used to submit comments, officials said. The agency approved the repeal in late 2017.


      I've been following the story for the past few years on a tech news site.

Ajit Pai, then the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, announced a plan to repeal the net neutrality rules in April 2017. Around the same time, Broadband for America started to pay providers of lead generation services — companies that gather customers for clients as part of marketing efforts — millions of dollars to generate comments at the F.C.C. and letters to Congress supporting the repeal.

Investigators said that Broadband for America acted to give Mr. Pai "cover" to repeal the broadband regulations. The internet providers have staunchly opposed attempts to regulate the industry for years, including by pushing for Congress to approve weaker rules instead.


     Pai may not have been the worst of the Trumpist slimeballs (it's a target rich environment), but I took his slimeyness more personally than I did the others.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on May 06, 2021, 12:28:11 PM
Quote from: drogulus on May 06, 2021, 09:51:20 AM
     Opposition to Net Neutrality Was Faked, New York Says: Live Updates (https://www.nytimes.com/live/2021/05/06/business/stock-market-today?type=styln-live-updates&label=economy%20updates&index=1&action=click&module=Spotlight&pgtype=Homepage#internet-providers-fake-comments-net-neutrality-new-york)

Internet service providers funded an effort that yielded millions of fake comments supporting the Federal Communications Commission's repeal of so-called net neutrality rules in 2017, the New York attorney general said on Thursday.

Internet providers, working through a group called Broadband for America, spent $4.2 million on the project, the attorney general said. The effort generated roughly nine million comments to the agency and letters to Congress backing the rollback, almost all of which were signed by people who had never agreed to the use of their names on such comments, according to the investigation. Some of the names had instead been obtained earlier, in other marketing efforts, and were then used to submit comments, officials said. The agency approved the repeal in late 2017.


      I've been following the story for the past few years on a tech news site.

Ajit Pai, then the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, announced a plan to repeal the net neutrality rules in April 2017. Around the same time, Broadband for America started to pay providers of lead generation services — companies that gather customers for clients as part of marketing efforts — millions of dollars to generate comments at the F.C.C. and letters to Congress supporting the repeal.

Investigators said that Broadband for America acted to give Mr. Pai "cover" to repeal the broadband regulations. The internet providers have staunchly opposed attempts to regulate the industry for years, including by pushing for Congress to approve weaker rules instead.


     Pai may not have been the worst of the Trumpist slimeballs (it's a target rich environment), but I took his slimeyness more personally than I did the others.

The sources I follow reported about these fake comments back in 2017. Where is this news in 2021? Your link goes to completely different stories...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 06, 2021, 04:43:11 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on May 06, 2021, 12:28:11 PM
The sources I follow reported about these fake comments back in 2017. Where is this news in 2021? Your link goes to completely different stories...

     I fixed the link, now go away and don't bother me. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/smiley.gif)

     Opposition to Net Neutrality Was Faked (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/06/technology/internet-providers-fake-comments-net-neutrality-new-york.html)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on May 06, 2021, 04:50:08 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on May 06, 2021, 12:28:11 PM
The sources I follow reported about these fake comments back in 2017. Where is this news in 2021? Your link goes to completely different stories...

Did we know it was funded by ISPs or just suspect back then?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 06, 2021, 06:48:23 PM
Quote from: Daverz on May 06, 2021, 04:50:08 PM
Did we know it was funded by ISPs or just suspect back then?

     This is the first I've read that they actually funded the effort. As far as suspicions go, who else would have been behind it? There was never any support for ending net neutrality among the public.

     I could be wrong and there's a "please throttle my internet" constituency out there, at least in principle. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/rolleyes.gif)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on May 06, 2021, 07:39:03 PM
Quote from: drogulus on May 06, 2021, 06:48:23 PM
     This is the first I've read that they actually funded the effort. As far as suspicions go, who else would have been behind it? There was never any support for ending net neutrality among the public.

     I could be wrong and there's a "please throttle my internet" constituency out there, at least in principle. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/rolleyes.gif)

Maybe Ajit found the comments in his giant Reeses mug.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Stürmisch Bewegt on May 07, 2021, 04:41:11 AM
I can't say with any authority what Jesus would have said about his flock toting such weaponry, but I suspect he would NOT have been happy with it.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on May 07, 2021, 05:03:14 AM
Quote from: Stürmisch Bewegt on May 07, 2021, 04:41:11 AM
I can't say with any authority what Jesus would have said about his flock toting such weaponry, but I suspect he would NOT have been happy with it.

What's Jesus have to do with it? — that guy in the dress looks Catholic!  :D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on May 07, 2021, 05:48:31 AM
Quote from: Stürmisch Bewegt on May 07, 2021, 04:41:11 AM
I can't say with any authority what Jesus would have said about his flock toting such weaponry, but I suspect he would NOT have been happy with it.
Anyone else think at first he was arranging them like a large xylophone and that was a mallet in his hand that he was using to play them?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Stürmisch Bewegt on May 07, 2021, 05:52:52 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on May 07, 2021, 05:03:14 AM
What's Jesus have to do with it? — that guy in the dress looks Catholic!  :D

Indeed  :laugh:! All religions have become overly political (though of course all through history they have been!) https://lacrossetribune.com/news/local/watch-now-la-crosse-catholic-priest-says-democrats-in-church-are-godless-and-imposters-in/article_e002e599-3c5a-5afa-8138-93844157644b.html
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Stürmisch Bewegt on May 07, 2021, 05:55:26 AM
Quote from: greg on May 07, 2021, 05:48:31 AM
Anyone else think at first he was arranging them like a large xylophone and that was a mallet in his hand that he was using to play them?

You're not wrong, he's playing them all right.  And their tune is a death march. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on May 07, 2021, 08:38:56 AM
Quote from: Stürmisch Bewegt on May 07, 2021, 05:55:26 AM
You're not wrong, he's playing them all right.  And their tune is a death march.
Reminds me of a video I've been enjoying lately, using guns as musical instruments:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMOh6r-erqI

Surely you'll hate it, but it's good fun.  ;D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on May 07, 2021, 09:47:41 AM
If anyone is interested, there is a better version of the political compass test:
https://sapplyvalues.github.io/


The original one that everyone is taking has supposedly had a strong left lib bias... in fact, my results ended up being very much left lib, and intuitively that seemed a little bit off. Seems like it should have been center + somewhat libertarian. So took this test and pretty much what I got. So try this one instead, seems to be better (the questions themselves seemed "better" as well).

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Stürmisch Bewegt on May 07, 2021, 10:43:53 AM
Quote from: greg on May 07, 2021, 08:38:56 AM
Reminds me of a video I've been enjoying lately, using guns as musical instruments:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMOh6r-erqI

Surely you'll hate it, but it's good fun.  ;D

Hmmmm...thanks.  So, that's what's called Heavy Mental, right? :-[
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Stürmisch Bewegt on May 07, 2021, 10:59:17 AM
Well, here's my result, not a shocker.  Had some quibbles with some of their terms; and some of the questions are to the max reductive, perhaps inevitable in such an undertaking.   
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 07, 2021, 12:03:10 PM
     (https://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=30359.0;attach=73580;image)

     I'm more of a chartalist than a chartist. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/smiley.gif)

     I guess it's a case of a picture being worth a thousand words, mostly ifs, ands, buts and splunges. The colors are nice.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: André on May 07, 2021, 12:29:49 PM
Quote from: drogulus on May 07, 2021, 12:03:10 PM
     (https://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=30359.0;attach=73580;image)

     I'm more of a chartalist than a chartist. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/smiley.gif)

     I guess it's a case a picture being worth a thousand words, mostly ifs, ands, buts and splunges. The colors are nice.


Must have been designed by a Canadian:

(https://i5.walmartimages.ca/images/Enlarge/148/335/148335.jpg)

We've used these school notebooks for the last, what ? 50 years ?

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Brahmsian on May 07, 2021, 12:33:20 PM
Quote from: André on May 07, 2021, 12:29:49 PM

Must have been designed by a Canadian:

(https://i5.walmartimages.ca/images/Enlarge/148/335/148335.jpg)

We've used these school notebooks for the last, what ? 50 years ?

:laugh: :laugh:  Yes, I didn't realize Hilroy was Canadian?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on May 07, 2021, 02:09:11 PM
Quote from: drogulus on May 07, 2021, 12:03:10 PM
I guess it's a case of a picture being worth a thousand words, mostly ifs, ands, buts and splunges. The colors are nice.
Wow, you score in the same exact spot as me. LOL.
this is your results, right???


Quote from: Stürmisch Bewegt on May 07, 2021, 10:43:53 AM
Hmmmm...thanks.  So, that's what's called Heavy Mental, right? :-[
Well, without the "n" in metal, yeah  :D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 07, 2021, 02:49:54 PM
Quote from: greg on May 07, 2021, 02:09:11 PM
Wow, you score in the same exact spot as me. LOL.
this is your results, right???

Well, without the "n" in metal, yeah  :D

     I just copied your chart. But probably we are exactly the same (made out of atoms and shit). (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/cheesy.gif)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Sergeant Rock on May 08, 2021, 03:42:52 AM
This result (much more than the first version which put me deep into the libertarian left) reflects my centrist views more accurately.

(https://photos.imageevent.com/sgtrock/june2017/index.png)


Sarge
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on May 08, 2021, 04:29:21 AM
Quote from: Stürmisch Bewegt on May 07, 2021, 10:59:17 AM
Well, here's my result, not a shocker.  Had some quibbles with some of their terms; and some of the questions are to the max reductive, perhaps inevitable in such an undertaking.

My result was similar to yours....

(hopefully moderator will approve the attachment...)

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 08, 2021, 08:45:55 AM
     Krugman Wonks Out: Braking Bad? When the Fed Fights Inflation. (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/07/opinion/federal-reserve-janet-yellen-inflation.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage)

     Krug never stops never stopping with his chart:

     (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2021/05/07/opinion/070521krugman1/070521krugman1-jumbo.png?quality=90&auto=webp)

     As a long time reader, genuinely appreciative of Krug for his empiricism, I know the chart deeply and what it's supposed to mean.

     Krug thinks if you get the interest rate right a good economy pops out. He sort of thinks that, or maybe he sort of does:

The usual caveats apply. Aggregate demand doesn't respond instantly to monetary policy, so this is a schematic, static representation of something that actually has hard-to-predict dynamics. We don't have really good estimates of the IS curve's slope or of the economy's maximum sustainable potential either, so if you ask, "how much would rates need to fall to achieve maximum employment" all we can provide is a modestly educated guess.

     See what I mean? You want to make policy on that? I would choose policy where the causal arrows are clear. It's interest rates that pop out of a good economy, not the reverse.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on May 08, 2021, 09:16:00 AM
Quote from: Sergeant Rock on May 08, 2021, 03:42:52 AM
This result (much more than the first version which put me deep into the libertarian left) reflects my centrist views more accurately.
I'm really glad to hear that, I might have to share this version of the test with more people, then.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on May 08, 2021, 09:55:29 AM
My result.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: ritter on May 08, 2021, 10:06:46 AM
I suppose I'm a moderately authoritarian centrist   ::)

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on May 08, 2021, 10:16:32 AM
Quote from: ritter on May 08, 2021, 10:06:46 AM
I suppose I'm a moderately authoritarian centrist   ::)

Given that my authoritarian score is lesser than yours but my right score is greater than yours, I suppose I'm a moderately authoritarian centrist either. ::)

But seriously now, authority without liberty is conceivable and historically documented but I very much doubt there can ever be liberty without authority.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on May 08, 2021, 10:25:01 AM
Quote from: Sergeant Rock on May 08, 2021, 03:42:52 AM
This result [...] reflects my centrist views more accurately.

Ditto. The older version put me too much to the left --- I have never ever identified myself as left (not even center-left), let alone leftist. Centrist, probably center-right is where I stand. In strictly Romanian terms, I identify myself as a Liberal. I've always voted a party called National Liberal Party, except when I voted a party called Liberal Democratic Party. For comparison, in Germany I'd vote CDU, in Spain PP,  in The Netherlands CDA and in the UK the Conservatives --- implying I agree with most but not the whole of their agendas.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on May 08, 2021, 01:30:37 PM
Interesting that everyone else scored above the authoritarian line.  >:D  ;D

But IIRC the original test had a question like "Absolute power corrupts absolutely" which seems to be a saying most people probably agree with.
And this one had a question like "Having admirable people in positions of power (not corrupted) is a good thing" which again, probably most agree with.

That question seemed more realistic and reasonable IMO, and probably explains the push upwards.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Stürmisch Bewegt on May 08, 2021, 02:46:50 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on May 08, 2021, 04:29:21 AM
My result was similar to yours....

(hopefully moderator will approve the attachment...)

Yay! Can world domination be far behind?   ;)

Seriously, was surprised to see the survey designers use the word "Communism" in one of their questions when "Socialism" would seem to have been a more appropriate choice.  I suspect their use of the term is revelatory of some agenda. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on May 08, 2021, 05:39:41 PM
I didn't get a red dot on my graph at the end.

Perhaps my results were off the chart.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on May 08, 2021, 06:43:25 PM
My results
I tend to think of myself as being center right, but this puts me to the left
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on May 09, 2021, 12:34:07 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on May 08, 2021, 05:39:41 PM
I didn't get a red dot on my graph at the end.

Perhaps my results were off the chart.

Just like New Zealand is off the map.  ;D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on May 09, 2021, 08:59:55 AM
OK, here's me.  Slightly more Left and more Authoritarian than most (-- but don't call me a Commie  ;) )

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: André on May 09, 2021, 01:01:22 PM
Can't post the image, but results are -2.33 and -0.33, with 4.69 on the progressive/conservative axis.

This must not be from a university. There are grammatical errors in the questions - or at least a glaring one.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on May 09, 2021, 06:45:47 PM
Quote from: André on May 09, 2021, 01:01:22 PM
This must not be from a university. There are grammatical errors in the questions - or at least a glaring one.

it's obviously not a serious test
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 09, 2021, 06:47:58 PM
Quote from: Herman on May 09, 2021, 06:45:47 PM
it's obviously not a serious test

"For entertainment purposes only."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on May 09, 2021, 07:19:23 PM
It seems to have a number of people scoring much more moderately than they express themselves. Flattering most everyone that they can call themselves "center".
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on May 10, 2021, 05:05:44 AM
Hmm...against all the latest woke craziness of the left and still on the left?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 10, 2021, 06:15:14 AM
Quote from: milk on May 10, 2021, 05:05:44 AM
Hmm...against all the latest woke craziness of the left and still on the left?

That does not strike me as unreasonable.  Most of the Left ain't "woke."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 10, 2021, 06:23:01 AM
Quote from: milk on May 10, 2021, 05:05:44 AM
Hmm...against all the latest woke craziness of the left and still on the left?

     This is perfectly reasonable. The left treats the propositions of liberalism as ethical as well as empirical. Democratic values are desirable and work well, considered in isolation and in practice together. So "still on the left" should be the default, as it was for leftist Alan Sokal when he launched the most effective assault on leftist absolutism ever in the '90s.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 10, 2021, 07:31:59 AM

     In regards to the battle against woke leftism, the critics on the right have some explaining to do. When they do explain, it usually amounts an argument for the correct absolute against the wrong one. Sadly, hilarity doesn't often ensue.

     The theo-politics of the "Wrong God" doesn't defend liberalism, it attacks from a different direction.

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on May 10, 2021, 07:52:02 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on May 09, 2021, 08:59:55 AM
OK, here's me.  Slightly more Left and more Authoritarian than most (-- but don't call me a Commie  ;) )

Pinko, then.  >:D :P
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on May 10, 2021, 07:54:39 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on May 09, 2021, 07:19:23 PM
It seems to have a number of people scoring much more moderately than they express themselves. Flattering most everyone that they can call themselves "center".

Just for fun, could you please post your scores? Not the graph, just the scores.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on May 10, 2021, 08:00:49 AM
Quote from: Florestan on May 10, 2021, 07:54:39 AM
Just for fun, could you please post your scores? Not the graph, just the scores.

Why no graph?  They're easier to interpret at a glance.  8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on May 10, 2021, 08:01:40 AM
Quote from: Florestan on May 10, 2021, 07:52:02 AM
Pinko, then.  >:D :P

Better than Red, I guess.  :D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on May 10, 2021, 08:03:34 AM
Quote from: milk on May 10, 2021, 05:05:44 AM
Hmm...against all the latest woke craziness of the left and still on the left?
You could probably separate it quite easily from the left (or politics in general) if you wanted to, identity politics is almost the same on the left and right, but who's the good guy and bad guy is reversed.
The error in it all of it is viewing people as parts of a group instead of as individuals.
I'm not sure that quiz had any "woke" questions, though.
And even then would also depend what it's asking... if it had a question about gender identity, I totally get what that is and don't confuse it with biological sex, which is what conservatives really tend to do a LOT. Which would have pushed me left.


Quote from: SimonNZ on May 09, 2021, 07:19:23 PM
It seems to have a number of people scoring much more moderately than they express themselves. Flattering most everyone that they can call themselves "center".
If you really scored off the chart (though i don't see how that's possible lol), then moderate is going to be seem quite extreme...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on May 10, 2021, 08:12:01 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on May 10, 2021, 08:00:49 AM
Why no graph?  They're easier to interpret at a glance.  8)

Agreed completely, but:

https://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,30359.msg1367042.html#msg1367042 (https://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,30359.msg1367042.html#msg1367042)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on May 10, 2021, 08:16:21 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on May 10, 2021, 08:01:40 AM
Better than Red, I guess.  :D

Well, better than the Devil is good enough, I guess.  ;D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on May 10, 2021, 09:08:26 AM
Well, that's too funny. I took the old test (Political Compass) and answered in all earnest only the questions which seemed neutral to me; I picked the default wrong answer for all the questions which were obviously biased towards the left.

This is what I got:

(https://www.politicalcompass.org/chart?ec=3.5&soc=2.92)

Economic Left/Right: 3.5
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 2.92

Now compare it to the new test, for which I answered all questions in all earnest.

(https://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=30359.0;attach=73606;image)

Pretty much the same, I'd say.  8)

Be it as it may, I am obviously farther right than anyone else.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on May 10, 2021, 10:27:48 AM
Quote from: drogulus on May 10, 2021, 06:23:01 AM
"still on the left" should be the default

For whom?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on May 10, 2021, 11:26:59 AM
Quote from: Florestan on May 10, 2021, 09:08:26 AM
Well, that's too funny. I took the old test (Political Compass) and answered in all earnest only the questions which seemed neutral to me; I picked the default wrong answer for all the questions which were obviously biased towards the left.
Very interesting!


Quote from: Florestan on May 10, 2021, 09:08:26 AM
Be it as it may, I am obviously farther right than anyone else.
Which is a good thing IMO.
People look for safety in online communities (or real world ones), which means joining like-minded individuals, and eventually forms an echo chamber/tribe/bubble, etc.
The result is rival tribes (even in the same country) that have adapted to very different environments over time, so their worldview is so vastly different that there is no hope for peace.
Probably hopeless at this point in regards to the "culture war," but the solution could possibly have been to have people with opposing viewpoints be a part of the opposing tribe as soon as it was formed (assuming they themselves don't change).

Providing some sort of counterbalance may help preventing dogmatic/ideological thinking...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on May 10, 2021, 11:42:01 AM
Quote from: greg on May 10, 2021, 11:26:59 AM
Very interesting!

Ain't it?

Quotepeople with opposing viewpoints

Only a truly totalitarian, ie deranged mind, would want to live in a world where everyone thought, believed and behaved the same way.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 10, 2021, 12:28:04 PM
And any adult understands that not everyone is going to agree with him.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 10, 2021, 02:00:55 PM
Quote from: Florestan on May 10, 2021, 10:27:48 AM
For whom?

      When liberalism is under attack, liberals defend it. That's the default. Becoming conservative is not a defense.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 10, 2021, 02:07:45 PM
Quote from: Florestan on May 10, 2021, 11:42:01 AM


Only a truly totalitarian, ie deranged mind, would want to live in a world where everyone thought, believed and behaved the same way.


     (https://i2.wp.com/deepdivedocumentaries.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/thumbsup-jesus-2000x1200-1.jpg?resize=1080%2C675&ssl=1)

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on May 10, 2021, 02:55:45 PM
Quote from: milk on May 10, 2021, 05:05:44 AM
Hmm...against all the latest woke craziness of the left and still on the left?

Poor milk, those kids still won't get off his lawn.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on May 11, 2021, 03:20:52 AM
Quote from: Daverz on May 10, 2021, 02:55:45 PM
Poor milk, those kids still won't get off his lawn.
look out your front window!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on May 11, 2021, 05:29:15 AM
The U of Chicago Project on Security and Threats has concluded that the primary motivation for the January 6 insurrection was fear of the "great replacement," that is, it was primarily about race. The majority of the insurrectionists were from counties Biden won where demographic shifts toward people of color are under way. The main complaint was that the rights of POC are being advanced faster than those of white people. The mob included large numbers of business owners, professionals, middle management and white collar workers.

The director of the study can be heard summarizing the conclusions here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dskVval50AE
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 11, 2021, 07:25:33 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on May 11, 2021, 05:29:15 AM
The main complaint was that the rights of POC are being advanced faster than those of white people.


     A related phenomenon is the fear among Repubs that economic expansion will benefit people with lower incomes more than it will those with higher incomes. The only way it can happen is if workers and consumers make gains that the rich will inevitably share. But that's what's wrong with robust growth. It empowers the wrong people.

     The rich don't want to be taxed. That much is true. I think the more important fear is that more money will be spent into the economy, upsetting the current balance of power.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 11, 2021, 08:25:34 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on May 11, 2021, 05:29:15 AM
The main complaint was that the rights of POC are being advanced faster than those of white people.

The fact that this is related to the self-evident truth that whites are not, have never been an "oppressed minority" gets no consideration in the right-wing disinformation ecosystem.

the "great replacement" = "I don't recognize America anymore."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 12, 2021, 06:26:29 AM

     McCarthy Bows Before the Big Lie, Axes Cheney, and Begs Trump to Eat Him Last (https://www.thedailybeast.com/coward-kevin-mccarthy-bows-before-the-big-lie-axes-liz-cheney-and-begs-trump-to-eat-him-last?ref=home)

     (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/cheesy.gif)

     One point made by expert pointers is that the Miracle of Maricopa portends the future. Whatever your preference in a voting booth might be in future elections, Repubs have your back. They will correctly intuit how fraudulent you are according to how you vote. Why bother objecting to such a sensible and beneficent arrangement?

The Republican position now is to try and rig elections up front with voter suppression and, if a deserving Republican should nonetheless lose, to contest the validity of the vote. Few will have the time, money or chutzpah to launch as many baseless challenges as Trump did. But the seeds have been planted to grow the presumption that a Republican who doesn't win but should have must be the victim of fraud. So far, 70 percent of the party believes Trump won and 50 percent that there's "solid evidence" Democrats were behind it.

It's the poison Cheney warned about.


     Liz who?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 13, 2021, 10:49:35 AM

     The GOP has lost its way. Fellow Americans, join our new alliance. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/05/13/new-gop-alliance-dent-peters-riggleman-steele-whitman/)

     Repub zanies should welcome this development. Truly, they should fund anything that's got Bill Weld in it!

     They're not funding it, are they? No, I guess not. That would be too perfect.

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on May 15, 2021, 05:08:48 PM
I was reading in the McCullough biography of Truman just yesterday about Margaret Chase Smith's "Declaration Of Conscience" speech against fealty to McCarthy and McCarthyism in her party ("I don't want to see the Republican Party ride to political victory on the Four Horsemen of Calumny -- Fear, Ignorance, Bigotry and Smear.") and was thinking how well it reflected the current Liz Cheney moment.

And this morning I hear on the Bulwark podcast the same speech quoted for the same reason. (They added that part of McCarthy's blustering response was to give her and her co-signers juvenile nicknames).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 16, 2021, 07:46:45 AM

     My admiration for Cheney is minuscule.

     https://www.youtube.com/v/dV95ELQaRYM

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 16, 2021, 09:23:47 AM

     Photo emerges of Republican barricading chamber doors during US Capitol attack after he compared rioters to 'tourists' (https://news.yahoo.com/photo-emerges-republican-barricading-chamber-145745971.html)

     (https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/yKMldohWkRSmkt8Auc.jWw--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjt3PTcwNTtoPTUyOC43NTtjZj13ZWJw/https://s.yimg.com/uu/api/res/1.2/I.oviUpsuBUbInUltyWIIw--~B/aD0xNTM2O3c9MjA0ODthcHBpZD15dGFjaHlvbg--/https://media.zenfs.com/en/the_independent_635/74404c77fd599cd3f0f1b0e2ee4c358a)

     I sympathize. Tourists are an unruly bunch. Don't we all know that?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: geralmar on May 18, 2021, 12:56:18 PM
Another Jan. 6 photo of same representative (far left) cowering from "tourists".

(https://i.postimg.cc/zvd7Z1Jy/720e0a39573103c0bef2b3f367dbf76afdfc89ebb99675ef42c4bc86abc3e4c3.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

Edit: Representative Andrew Clyde, Georgia, described the January 6 insurrection, "a normal tourist visit".  His qualification for office is "gun dealer".
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 18, 2021, 03:13:19 PM

     Palm Beach County prosecutor says Gov. Ron DeSantis can't stop Trump from getting extradited to New York if he's indicted (https://news.yahoo.com/palm-beach-county-prosecutor-says-133112663.html)

     The way it will work is Trump will make a court appearance in NY, plead not guilty and go home. Nobody will come to arrest the Orange Perp unless he refuses to cooperate. I hope that's not too disappointing.

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 19, 2021, 08:37:16 AM
But the second reason is arguably more important: the threat is ongoing.

Former President Trump has still not conceded the 2020 election. He continues to stoke conspiracies about a rigged election. He and his allies continue to organize their efforts both on a state and national level, united under false claims about the 2020 election. He has even gone so far as to suggest that the election could still be overturned. Here's one of his recent pronouncements:

"If a thief robs a jewelry store of all of its diamonds (the 2020 Presidential Election), the diamonds must be returned."

Just because something is stupid doesn't mean it can't also be dangerous.

Why America Needs a January 6 Commission (https://thebulwark.com/why-america-needs-a-january-6-commission/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 19, 2021, 09:28:12 AM
     Kevin McCarthy proves Liz Cheney's point (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/05/19/mccarthy-shows-why-we-cant-allow-mccarthy-become-speaker/)

McCarthy's cowardly position betrays his own members, shows he will continue to put MAGA obedience above truth and democracy, and reminds the country why it would be dangerous to make him speaker. Part of his motivation is likely attributable to his own role as a witness. Unless he perjures himself or refuses to testify (risking a contempt finding), he will have to testify about a phone call on Jan. 6 in which he failed to persuade the outgoing president to rescue the Capitol. (Cheney has made clear that McCarthy should testify and added that she hopes he will do so without a subpoena.) The phone call indicts both people in that conversation — the president for refusing to perform his duties and McCarthy in covering up that salient point.

      We have enough knowledge of the Trump-McCarthy phone call on Jan. 6 to view it as essential to know more. CNN reported in February thusly:

McCarthy insisted that the rioters were Trump's supporters and begged Trump to call them off.

Trump's comment set off what Republican lawmakers familiar with the call described as a shouting match between the two men. A furious McCarthy told the then-President the rioters were breaking into his office through the windows, and asked Trump, "Who the f--k do you think you are talking to?" according to a Republican lawmaker familiar with the call.

The newly revealed details of the call, described to CNN by multiple Republicans briefed on it, provide critical insight into the President's state of mind as rioters were overrunning the Capitol. The existence of the call and some of its details were first reported by Punchbowl News and discussed publicly by McCarthy.


     McCarthy is caught. Refusing to answer questions about this phone call endorses the worst interpretation of it. Trump supported the coup he inspired.

     As it has turned out, Trump did know who he was talking to. McCarthy has proved to be a spineless MAGAccomplice.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 20, 2021, 01:08:02 PM
What If Roe Is Overturned? (https://thebulwark.com/what-if-roe-is-overturned/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 20, 2021, 01:23:34 PM
Obviously, the larger story is much more than American politics:

A 'Confident' Biden Keeps His Distance from Israel-Palestine 'Swamp' (https://www.thedailybeast.com/a-confident-biden-keeps-his-distance-from-israel-palestine-swamp?ref=home)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on May 21, 2021, 02:28:51 AM
I don't think there's anything necessarily wrong with criticizing Israel, nor do I think Israel's supporters are lacking in rejoinders. However, I do wonder why this particular conflict gets so much attention from "the squad" and now the woke hoard. Also, big artists like Roger Waters and Eno are vociferous on this particular issue. Why do think this is (asking for a friend)? 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on May 21, 2021, 05:37:37 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 20, 2021, 01:23:34 PM
Obviously, the larger story is much more than American politics:

A 'Confident' Biden Keeps His Distance from Israel-Palestine 'Swamp' (https://www.thedailybeast.com/a-confident-biden-keeps-his-distance-from-israel-palestine-swamp?ref=home)

DailyBeast, "His administration avoided placing too much public pressure on Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu because they suspected he would make a public display of ignoring it."

And Netanyahu could ignore it because because his thumbing Biden would be unlikely to significantly affect US foreign policy or material aid to Israel.  No aspect of US foreign policy has ever be so consistent over so long a time as its unconditional support for Israel has been.

It's probably not going too far to say that Israel would not exist as we know it today without US support.  But Netanyahu and the Israeli Right doesn't have to worry about that support being withdrawn in anything but the most transparently token way.  The pro-Zionist lobby in the USA, exemplified by organizations such as the AIPA (https://www.aipac.org/)C, have nut-crushing grip on American politicians, mainly through the manipulation of campaign contributions to Congress members.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on May 21, 2021, 06:05:05 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on May 21, 2021, 05:37:37 AM
DailyBeast, "His administration avoided placing too much public pressure on Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu because they suspected he would make a public display of ignoring it."

And Netanyahu could ignore it because because his thumbing Biden would be unlikely to significantly affect US foreign policy or material aid to Israel.  No aspect of US foreign policy has ever be so consistent over so long a time as its unconditional support for Israel has been.

It's probably not going too far to say that Israel would not exist as we know it today without US support.  But Netanyahu and the Israeli Right doesn't have to worry about that support being withdrawn in anything but the most transparently token way.  The pro-Zionist lobby in the USA, exemplified by organizations such as the AIPA (https://www.aipac.org/)C, have nut-crushing grip on American politicians, mainly through the manipulation of campaign contributions to Congress members.
so you think they're bought off by cash and if someone paid them more to go in another direction, they'd be gone. You don't think there are other policies the U.S. has consistently supported? I agree U.S. support goes a long way and Netanyahu thumbed his nose at Obama in an obnoxious way. The settler movement too. But none of this answers my question.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on May 21, 2021, 06:25:20 AM
Quote from: milk on May 21, 2021, 02:28:51 AM
I don't think there's anything necessarily wrong with criticizing Israel, nor do I think Israel's supporters are lacking in rejoinders. However, I do wonder why this particular conflict gets so much attention from "the squad" and now the woke hoard. Also, big artists like Roger Waters and Eno are vociferous on this particular issue. Why do think this is (asking for a friend)?

Perhaps because they care about long-standing crimes against humanity? Perhaps because they're ashamed that U.S. support is furthering heinous oppression? Just guessing.  ::)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on May 21, 2021, 07:00:50 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on May 21, 2021, 06:25:20 AM
Perhaps because they care about long-standing crimes against humanity? Perhaps because they're ashamed that U.S. support is furthering heinous oppression? Just guessing.  ::)
there are other much worse things nobody seems to care about. You think Eno and Waters are on it because of U.S. aid? Maybe. I'm not saying they shouldn't advocate for their cause. Everyone can do what they want. I'm just curious why this gets so much air. If the U.S. cut aid do you think Eno and Waters and "the squad" would cool their jets? I'm skeptical.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on May 21, 2021, 07:26:56 AM
Quote from: milk on May 21, 2021, 07:00:50 AM
there are other much worse things nobody seems to care about. You think Eno and Waters are on it because of U.S. aid? Maybe. I'm not saying they shouldn't advocate for their cause. Everyone can do what they want. I'm just curious why this gets so much air. If the U.S. cut aid do you think Eno and Waters and "the squad" would cool their jets? I'm skeptical.

Ha!!  That certainly sounds like Whataboutism.

As for there not be anything "necessarily wrong" with criticizing Israel, there is something very right about it.  And as for Israel's supporters having rejoinders, their favorite and classic still seems to be that criticism  of Israel is ipso facto anti-Semitic which is a logical fallacy.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 21, 2021, 07:30:50 AM

     What does it mean for a state to be "religiously democratic"? As a matter of practice, it means one eats the other. Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Jewish, Buddhist states are oppression engines that can't simultaneously uphold secular humanist principles. The modern democratic tradition developed out of a struggle against tyranny that was either allied with religious forces or controlled by them. You can't make them play nice. They don't cooperate.

     The US has at times come close to a detente between the forces of the sky tyrant and self governing groundlings. We can allow ourselves to have rights as long as they were tyrant given, the most unnatural form of naturalism one could devise, but what else can you do to keep enemies in the same tent but drug them into a stupor? The Bog itself is the author of our Bogless notions of self governance! Yeah let's do that!

     

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on May 21, 2021, 09:24:11 AM
Quote from: milk on May 21, 2021, 07:00:50 AM
there are other much worse things nobody seems to care about. You think Eno and Waters are on it because of U.S. aid? Maybe. I'm not saying they shouldn't advocate for their cause. Everyone can do what they want. I'm just curious why this gets so much air. If the U.S. cut aid do you think Eno and Waters and "the squad" would cool their jets? I'm skeptical.

The current kerfuffle is purely political. A corrupt politician appealing to his right-wing base by evicting Palestinians and harassing them in their places of worship. It's the usual symbiotic relationship between extremists on both sides. Said corrupt politician gives his yahoos what they want in violation of international law to force a response from Hamas, thereby making himself seem indispensable to Israelis and Hamas temporarily seem good for something to the Palestinians. The same kind of symbiotic relationship U.S. politicians maintained for decades with Castro.     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 21, 2021, 09:36:50 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on May 21, 2021, 09:24:11 AM
The current kerfuffle is purely political. A corrupt politician appealing to his right-wing base by evicting Palestinians and harassing them in their places of worship. It's the usual symbiotic relationship between extremists on both sides. Said corrupt politician gives his yahoos what they want in violation of international law to force a response from Hamas, thereby making himself seem indispensable to Israelis and Hamas temporarily seem good for something to the Palestinians. The same kind of symbiotic relationship U.S. politicians maintained for decades with Castro.     


     Hamas is a beautiful enemy to have.

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on May 21, 2021, 02:26:05 PM
Quote from: Fëanor on May 21, 2021, 07:26:56 AM
Ha!!  That certainly sounds like Whataboutism.

As for there not be anything "necessarily wrong" with criticizing Israel, there is something very right about it.  And as for Israel's supporters having rejoinders, their favorite and classic still seems to be that criticism  of Israel is ipso facto anti-Semitic which is a logical fallacy.
no, it's not. I didn't deflect any criticism. Let people criticize.  It's merely a question: why do they care so much about this one issue over all others, especially when there are much worse conflicts in terms of death and human rights. I am not saying they shouldn't criticize or care. I'm just curious what makes so many prominent people focused on one thing. It's a simple question. I accept the partial answer that it has to do with U.S. aid. That's AN answer.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on May 21, 2021, 02:55:31 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on May 21, 2021, 09:24:11 AM
The current kerfuffle is purely political. A corrupt politician appealing to his right-wing base by evicting Palestinians and harassing them in their places of worship. It's the usual symbiotic relationship between extremists on both sides. Said corrupt politician gives his yahoos what they want in violation of international law to force a response from Hamas, thereby making himself seem indispensable to Israelis and Hamas temporarily seem good for something to the Palestinians. The same kind of symbiotic relationship U.S. politicians maintained for decades with Castro.     
This sounds about right. The Palestinians seem to win on sympathy and increased attention to their plight, Hamas justifies its existence, and Israel gets rid of all those rockets and tunnels. Why does Hamas waste their time and moral capital on the rockets? I guess it's partially cynical since the death that comes back brings martyrdom and attention?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 21, 2021, 04:32:33 PM

     Why do I care about Israel and Palestinians more than I care about Boko Haram or Tigray? Or, how come I care so much about Nigeria when there are so many people starving in StarvingPeopleLand? What's wrong with my priorities? This mode of argument should die.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on May 21, 2021, 04:43:06 PM
Quote from: milk on May 21, 2021, 02:26:05 PM
no, it's not. I didn't deflect any criticism. Let people criticize.  It's merely a question: why do they care so much about this one issue over all others, especially when there are much worse conflicts in terms of death and human rights. I am not saying they shouldn't criticize or care. I'm just curious what makes so many prominent people focused on one thing. It's a simple question. I accept the partial answer that it has to do with U.S. aid. That's AN answer.

I suppose another part of the answer is that, since inception, Israel has claimed a moral high ground it has never deserved and the USA has uncritically supported it on that basis.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on May 21, 2021, 04:54:10 PM
Quote from: milk on May 21, 2021, 02:26:05 PM
no, it's not. I didn't deflect any criticism. Let people criticize.  It's merely a question: why do they care so much about this one issue over all others, especially when there are much worse conflicts in terms of death and human rights. I am not saying they shouldn't criticize or care. I'm just curious what makes so many prominent people focused on one thing. It's a simple question. I accept the partial answer that it has to do with U.S. aid. That's AN answer.

The people you're grouping together are not interested in just this one issue alone.

I would imagine many have written or made public statements and the arguments in those might go some way to answering your questions.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on May 21, 2021, 04:54:26 PM
Quote from: milk on May 21, 2021, 02:55:31 PM
This sounds about right. The Palestinians seem to win on sympathy and increased attention to their plight, Hamas justifies its existence, and Israel gets rid of all those rockets and tunnels. Why does Hamas waste their time and moral capital on the rockets? I guess it's partially cynical since the death that comes back brings martyrdom and attention?

Perhaps you aren't aware that tunnel systems are also maintained to allow the flow of commerce that Israel strangles? As for the rockets, it's all they have and resisting an armed occupation is the right of any oppressed people.   
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on May 21, 2021, 05:03:10 PM
Quote from: milk on May 21, 2021, 02:26:05 PM
no, it's not. I didn't deflect any criticism. Let people criticize.  It's merely a question: why do they care so much about this one issue over all others, especially when there are much worse conflicts in terms of death and human rights.

But it's not a serious question. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on May 21, 2021, 05:54:14 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on May 21, 2021, 04:54:10 PM
The people you're grouping together are not interested in just this one issue alone.

I would imagine many have written or made public statements and the arguments in those might go some way to answering your questions.
I don't think so. I really doubt it. But I haven't been through all Brian Eno's tweets. Maybe he's big into Sri Lanka.
Quote from: BasilValentine on May 21, 2021, 04:54:26 PM
Perhaps you aren't aware that tunnel systems are also maintained to allow the flow of commerce that Israel strangles? As for the rockets, it's all they have and resisting an armed occupation is the right of any oppressed people.   
I think firing rockets into cities has the same moral problem from whichever side they're shot. Plus, there's a doctrine in just war that can be applied about winnable strategies. The Hamas rockets don't accomplish any objective other than causing more death and martyrdom. Unless you believe killing yourselves and your enemy is justified in order to create more media. The Israeli actions can be seen to transgress different rules about proportionality and just cause. That's if you care about Just War Theory which I admit is quite flawed.
Quote from: drogulus on May 21, 2021, 04:32:33 PM
     Why do I care about Israel and Palestinians more than I care about Boko Haram or Tigray? Or, how come I care so much about Nigeria when there are so many people starving in StarvingPeopleLand? What's wrong with my priorities? This mode of argument should die.
no. I made no such argument. You're free to care about any issue you want. There's nothing wrong with caring about the atrocities in Israel. I'm just curious why this conflict gets the attention. I don't see why anyone should be defensive about the question.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on May 21, 2021, 05:55:24 PM
Quote from: Fëanor on May 21, 2021, 04:43:06 PM
I suppose another part of the answer is that, since inception, Israel has claimed a moral high ground it has never deserved and the USA has uncritically supported it on that basis.
What's the moral high ground?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on May 21, 2021, 06:06:59 PM
Quote from: Daverz on May 21, 2021, 05:03:10 PM

But it's not a serious question.
I don't understand what you mean. I'm asking it seriously.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on May 21, 2021, 06:47:15 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on May 21, 2021, 04:54:26 PM
Perhaps you aren't aware that tunnel systems are also maintained to allow the flow of commerce that Israel strangles? As for the rockets, it's all they have and resisting an armed occupation is the right of any oppressed people.

That last sentence is a bit of moral depravity. Sadly it is typical of the Left. No sensible definition of resisting includes killing civilians going about their normal lives.  No sane morality says that Hamas firing those rockets was justified.
If you think otherwise, you're saying it's okay for Hamas to kill Israelis and kill Jews worldwide.

You are saying that since I am a Jew it's okay if someone murders me in the name of Palestine.  That's what your statement about the right of resistance actually means.

You want a Free Palestine? Hamas oppresses the people of Gaza and has killed more Palestinians in the last 17 years than Israel. You should be demanding the world force Hamas out of Gaza. You should be demanding the PA leadership be replaced with people who are not kleptocrats. You should be demanding Assad be held to account for killing over 4000 Palestinians in Syria and destroying Yarmouk, one of the largest Palestinians camps in the world. You should be demanding Lebanon vaccinate the Palestinians who now live there (currently Lebanon refuses to do so), and allow Palestinians the right to work in jobs of their choice ( currently it does not).

But if you are like the average Leftist you have never heard any of the things I referred to. You just pretend that Hamas's goal of killing the 7 million Jews is a project worthy of your support.  And then you wonder why Jews decide the Left is irredeemably antisemitic. Last week a crowd marched through London shouting the Khaibyr chant, the Islamic version of "Kill the Jews". And all Jeremy Corbyn could do is complain they were "undermining" the Palestinian cause, and add a platitude about how antisemitism is bad just like all other forms of racism. Truth to tell that's better than a lot of other Leftists.

Feanor is repeating a trope that became antisemitic canon with the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, and which the British Left channels under the guise of control by the Board of Deputies. But at least he doesn't defend killing Jews as a legitimate enterprise.  Basil isn't criticizing Israel. He's pretending we should have no objection to Hamas's efforts to kill Jews.

All week long when I go online I've seen antisemitism in its most basic forms. GMG is supposed to be a haven. Now I come here and find a member defending the idea it's okay to murder me.  Sorry if this post seems a bit over the top. It'd actually restrained.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on May 21, 2021, 07:16:31 PM
Quote from: JBS on May 21, 2021, 06:47:15 PM
Feanor is repeating a trope that became antisemitic canon with the Protocols of the Elders of Zion,

WTF, are you having some kind of vaccine reaction?  There's nothing like that in Feanor's posts.  It looks to me like you just wanted to throw a rhetorical grenade in the room.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 21, 2021, 07:36:29 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on May 21, 2021, 04:54:26 PM
Perhaps you aren't aware that tunnel systems are also maintained to allow the flow of commerce that Israel strangles? As for the rockets, it's all they have and resisting an armed occupation is the right of any oppressed people.   

     Hamas has no rights and recognizes none. The tragedy is that Gazans are held hostage by these "freedom fighters". That's why they are such a gift to Bibi and the other Israeli megacynics who exploit the struggle for their own ends. Perhaps the last few years of Trumpist border sadism casts a different light on Israeli actions.

Quote from: JBS on May 21, 2021, 06:47:15 PM


You are saying that since I am a Jew it's okay if someone murders me in the name of Palestine.

     This doesn't work. Israeli policy would not be any less abhorrent if they were super-Christians. I don't care any more that Bibi is a Jew than I care that some random Hamas terrorist is a Muslim. Hitler was an Austrian, I'm a Texan, though hardly a practicing one, the Myanmar junta is Buddhist. Should I be sensitive about these affiliations so that I neglect to point out the inhumanity of policies in these jurisdictions?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on May 22, 2021, 04:14:30 AM
Quote from: milk on May 21, 2021, 05:55:24 PM
What's the moral high ground?

Righteous behavior entitles one to claim a moral high ground;  hypocritical self-righteousness does not.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on May 22, 2021, 04:24:07 AM
Quote from: JBS on May 21, 2021, 06:47:15 PM
...
All week long when I go online I've seen antisemitism in its most basic forms. GMG is supposed to be a haven. Now I come here and find a member defending the idea it's okay to murder me.  Sorry if this post seems a bit over the top. It'd actually restrained.

Repeating that criticizing the policies of the government of Israel is anti-Semitic doesn't make it so.  Also, insisting that criticizing those policies is justifying the murder Israeli Jews doesn't make that so either.

Palestinian response to the creation of Israel and Israeli policies and action since has be fraught with stupidity and self-abuse.  True, but that does not justify Israeli oppression of Palestinians and its relentless, decades long drive to misappropriated ever more Palestinian territory.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on May 22, 2021, 04:59:31 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on May 22, 2021, 04:14:30 AM
Righteous behavior entitles one to claim a moral high ground;  hypocritical self-righteousness does not.
I'm not following you. You are saying that Israelis deserve some special attention for something in particular. I don't know what it is. Whatever human rights transgressions occur should be condemned, wherever they are. But the claim that Israel is special sounds suspicious to me. I can't see how Israel is any better or worse than, say, Sri Lanka, unless you're going on body counts, in which case Sri Lanka seems much worse (although I'm not an expert on this stuff and I could be wrong). But still, I'm not saying Israel has its hands clean. I also don't particularly agree with the BLM delusional narrative that sees Israelis as white racist colonizers. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 22, 2021, 06:36:43 AM


     The moral prestige of all the settler countries has dropped. Israel is facing the same reckoning as other ones have. Sooner or later the local version of "Manifest Destiny" is scrutinized.

Quote from: milk on May 22, 2021, 04:59:31 AM
I also don't particularly agree with the BLM delusional narrative that sees Israelis as white racist colonizers. 

     Are they an exception? Perhaps colonizers don't all behave the same. People don't always lose their homes by massacre. Sometimes it's done by law or treaty. And as I recall Native Americans engaged in massacres of settlers. The case of Israel is different, like all the other settler country cases.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on May 22, 2021, 07:02:05 AM
Quote from: drogulus on May 22, 2021, 06:36:43 AM

     The moral prestige of all the settler countries has dropped. Israel is facing the same reckoning as other ones have. Sooner or later the local version of "Manifest Destiny" is scrutinized.

     Are they an exception? Perhaps colonizers don't all behave the same. People don't always lose their homes by massacre. Sometimes it's done by law or treaty. And as I recall Native Americans engaged in massacres of settlers. The case of Israel is different, like all the other settler country cases.
I don't see "race" coming into it. And, obviously, half of Israel are probably a similar ethnicity to the arabs in the area and in every country around there that kicked them out. And everything should be scrutinized. I agree. I've no idea if it's possible to sort out that mess or to bring in some kind of acceptable fair agreement. As in Syria, Sri Lanka (etc.) (where the killing is much more extensive), I hope so. There used to be a peace movement in Israel but it seems gone now. It also seems like the woke left, that needs the fiction of race as the core of their ideology, reject a two-state solution now too. So what hope is there? I guess one can hope the regional players will be involved as maybe it's the only chance to get something done. But again, I know very little about Israel, Syria, Sri Lanka, etc. I just read the news.   
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 22, 2021, 07:22:47 AM
Quote from: milk on May 22, 2021, 07:02:05 AM
I don't see "race" coming into it.

     The racial and religious theorists will bring it in whether you approve or not. There are certainly people all over Israel/Palestine who would like to dispense with categories that do nothing but make people miserable and promote war and hatred. That view makes you the enemy of the rulers. You're a traitor to the reigning orthodoxy.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 22, 2021, 08:42:14 AM

     Most evictees are not zealots for any cause. They probably want to be left alone and live in peace. They fear the authority that is most able to harm them more than the more distant one in Gaza. That's a practical judgment not based on moral universals.

     Palestinians fear loss of family homes as evictions loom (https://apnews.com/article/middle-east-religion-2ba6f064df3964ceafb6e2ff02303d41)

     Israel has these families in a chokehold. How can they "comply"?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on May 22, 2021, 10:39:20 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on May 22, 2021, 04:24:07 AM
Repeating that criticizing the policies of the government of Israel is anti-Semitic doesn't make it so.  Also, insisting that criticizing those policies is justifying the murder Israeli Jews doesn't make that so either.

Palestinian response to the creation of Israel and Israeli policies and action since has be fraught with stupidity and self-abuse.  True, but that does not justify Israeli oppression of Palestinians and its relentless, decades long drive to misappropriated ever more Palestinian territory.

Basil was not criticising Israel. He was defending Hamas. He was saying that Hamas's actions were morally justified and we should end the blockade of Gaza, which would allow even more weapons and money to get to Hamas.

Your second paragraph I agree with.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on May 22, 2021, 10:50:33 AM
Quote from: drogulus on May 22, 2021, 08:42:14 AM
     Most evictees are not zealots for any cause. They probably want to be left alone and live in peace. They fear the authority that is most able to harm them more than the more distant one in Gaza. That's a practical judgment not based on moral universals.

     Palestinians fear loss of family homes as evictions loom (https://apnews.com/article/middle-east-religion-2ba6f064df3964ceafb6e2ff02303d41)

     Israel has these families in a chokehold. How can they "comply"?

Quite simple.
Pay rent to the actual owners of the property, who bought the legal title for those properties from the previous Jewish owners who were expelled by Jordan in 1948. This is after all a court case that's been going on for almost  50 years, a real life Jarndyce v Jarndyce.

Both sides here are being hypocrites. Israelis are denying the Right of Return to Palestinians in general but demanding it be recognized when the claimants are Jewish.  Palestinians claim living in a place for 70 years does not extinguish the rights of the previous property owners but demand that be done when the current tenants are Palestinian.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on May 22, 2021, 10:57:44 AM
For Daverz' information, this remark merely recycles a trope straight out of the Protocols.

Quote from: Fëanor on May 21, 2021, 05:37:37 AM
. The pro-Zionist lobby in the USA, exemplified by organizations such as the AIPA (https://www.aipac.org/)C, have nut-crushing grip on American politicians, mainly through the manipulation of campaign contributions to Congress members.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 22, 2021, 11:08:37 AM
Quote from: JBS on May 22, 2021, 10:50:33 AM
Quite simple.
Pay rent to the actual owners of the property, who bought the legal title for those properties from the previous Jewish owners who were expelled by Jordan in 1948. This is after all a court case that's been going on for almost  50 years, a real life Jarndyce v Jarndyce.

Both sides here are being hypocrites. Israelis are denying the Right of Return to Palestinians in general but demanding it be recognized when the claimants are Jewish.  Palestinians claim living in a place for 70 years does not extinguish the rights of the previous property owners but demand that be done when the current tenants are Palestinian.

     I'm aware of the court case. The government could step in to protect tenants rights against the purchasers of the rights of former owners. Just compensation could be awarded to property owners and people allowed to live in their homes, or if that's not the best outcome allow people to live in the neighborhood instead of using the dispute as a way of getting rid of them.

     If the case can drag on for decades why do people have to leave now, and why always to the extreme disadvantage of one party to this "unsettled" case? Is the case settled or isn't it? Why do I get the feeling that the losers were selected in advance?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on May 22, 2021, 11:15:50 AM
Quote from: drogulus on May 22, 2021, 11:08:37 AM
     I'm aware of the court case. The government could step in to protect tenants rights against the purchasers of the rights of former owners. Just compensation could be awarded to property owners and people allowed to live in their homes, or if that's not the best outcome allow people to live in the neighborhood instead of using the dispute as a way of getting rid of them.

     If the case can drag on for decades why do people have to leave now, and why always to the extreme disadvantage of one party to this "unsettled" case? Is the case settled or isn't it? Why do I get the feeling that the losers were selected in advance?

Apparently this court case is close to its end. But not quite. The Israeli Supreme Court was set to hand down a decision, but pushed it back at Bibi's request because of the riots.

The solution you suggest would be admirable, but Bibi does not have the imagination for that, and I suspect his political calculations would rule it out because he'd be criticized for giving in to Palestinian resistance.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 22, 2021, 11:53:24 AM
Quote from: JBS on May 22, 2021, 11:15:50 AM
Apparently this court case is close to its end. But not quite. The Israeli Supreme Court was set to hand down a decision, but pushed it back at Bibi's request because of the riots.

The solution you suggest would be admirable, but Bibi does not have the imagination for that, and I suspect his political calculations would rule it out because he'd be criticized for giving in to Palestinian resistance.

     Supreme Court delays session on Sheikh Jarrah evictions amid Jerusalem violence (https://www.timesofisrael.com/supreme-court-delays-session-on-sheikh-jarrah-evictions-amid-jerusalem-tensions/)

After the families asked Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit to become a party to the case, Mandelblit's office asked the Supreme Court for two weeks to consider the matter.

The court gave Mandelblit until June 8 to consider whether he will become a party to the case. The planned evictions — already approved by lower courts — will not go forward in the interim.


     OK, this suggests to me that there is some reason to think that Israel can be influenced to see the case through a broader justice and policy framework instead of in a legal framework designed for discriminatory purposes. Discrimination by law calls for a different response than unlawful discrimination. Israel can try to deny or deflect, but for a number of reasons that doesn't seem to be working as well as in the past. It's another way that smartphones and social media have shifted the ground.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on May 22, 2021, 01:53:05 PM
Quote from: milk on May 22, 2021, 07:02:05 AM
I just read the news.   

Which news do you read that has you heavily peppering you comments with "Woke left" and dragging The Squad and BLM into everything?

I'm really asking.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on May 22, 2021, 03:23:26 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on May 22, 2021, 01:53:05 PM
Which news do you read that has you heavily peppering you comments with "Woke left" and dragging The Squad and BLM into everything?

I'm really asking.
well, I'm talking about the history of The Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the history of the Sri Lankan civil war. I'm not expert in these problems and I recognize that my contributions are very weak. Most people commenting know very little. I'm open to hearing from people who really know the details even if they strongly disagree. I've tried to be a little careful NOT to say Israel is right or Hamas is blameless. As for the race question, I believe the tweets from BLM and various supporters are out there as reported by every outlet. They see Israel as white supremacists. I think it's a stupid position to hold.
The squad and BLM are allowed to comment on anything they want. And they do. Why shouldn't I have an opinion about it? They're a big driving course in society today. No?
I try to read widely: The New York Times and various left media as well as the National Review on the right. I lean left myself. I like The Hill Rising for being somewhat non-partisan.
I do think identitarianism is destroying the left and deflecting from the real problems we face.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on May 22, 2021, 03:44:34 PM
Quote from: milk on May 22, 2021, 03:23:26 PM
I lean left myself. I like The Hill Rising for being somewhat non-partisan.
Cool. Recently have been been watching them a bit more.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on May 22, 2021, 03:57:10 PM
Quote from: greg on May 22, 2021, 03:44:34 PM
Cool. Recently have been been watching them a bit more.
they definitely throw out some interesting commentary. Sometimes it's very left but the guy is a conservative. Engeti I think is his name? The woman is a kind of Bernie-leftist and they have right-wing guests from the Washington Times too. I bet you like their constant shade on Russia-gate. Good political commentary with some UFO stuff thrown in!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 22, 2021, 04:04:08 PM
     
Quote from: milk on May 22, 2021, 03:23:26 PM

I do think identitarianism is destroying the left and deflecting from the real problems we face.

     The right thinks identitarianism is destroying America. I think most of Wokeism will end up in the fictional sub-basements of Satanic day care centers. Excuse me now as I help Jacques Derrida destabilize the dominant discourse. Run for your lives!
     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 22, 2021, 04:05:55 PM
Quote from: milk on May 22, 2021, 03:23:26 PM
I do think identitarianism is destroying the left and deflecting from the real problems we face.

If that is true (and I do not say absolutely otherwise) I do not see it at all in solid blue Massachusetts, where focus ends to be local and practical.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on May 22, 2021, 05:11:37 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 22, 2021, 04:05:55 PM
If that is true (and I do not say absolutely otherwise) I do not see it at all in solid blue Massachusetts, where focus ends to be local and practical.
well I may have overstated it or maybe not. Maybe woke-ism just isn't addressing things but maybe it won't matter in the end. We live in a world where systems have failed us on a colossal level. The increase of wages in the poorest places from 1$ a day to 2$ is hailed as some kind of great progress in world poverty whereas huge inequality is seen really as normal. It's an obscene level of grafting from corporations and ultra-wealthy. Environmental destruction continues at alarming rates and when we pass the point of no return, we won't even know it. I do think our systems, education for one, are shockingly un-creative and that young people are handed a world that is fait accompli. Here in Japan, no one questions the order and people are basically serving institutions and bureaucracies. Maybe this woke track is just an understandable blind fumbling for some kind of answer. Good luck in Massachusetts. I think for many people in the world, things aren't looking up. I'm always in the market for a more positive outlook though.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on May 22, 2021, 05:17:43 PM
Quote from: drogulus on May 22, 2021, 04:04:08 PM
     
     The right thinks identitarianism is destroying America. I think most of Wokeism will end up in the fictional sub-basements of Satanic day care centers. Excuse me now as I help Jacques Derrida destabilize the dominant discourse. Run for your lives!
   
ha ha. The fact that no one can make sense of it means we can slacken our pace I guess. At best it's just a distraction then. Those right-wing loonies like Chris Rock, Billy Crystal, James Carville, and Dave Chapelle (I choose only comedians) should take a chill pill and go to Massachusetts.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on May 22, 2021, 06:21:37 PM
Quote from: milk on May 22, 2021, 05:11:37 PM
It's an obscene level of grafting from corporations and ultra-wealthy.
Oh, come on. Didn't you know that CEO's of multi-million dollar companies only ever cared about LGBT and BLM?

(http://files.spazioweb.it/51/f3/51f3033a-525d-4a4a-a77d-e53cf63b1db6.jpg)


I'd imagine a racial narrative for the cause of class disparity would be something they prefer, rather than an economic one, as worshippers of the dollar. Even if it's not rooted in truth. Money is the only truth to them.
And it requires no actual change to the system, it's just kind words to appease the "lower class" of people so they don't ask for higher wages. Being anti-union but pro-woke at the same time, sounds genuine, right?  :P
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 22, 2021, 06:38:32 PM
Quote from: milk on May 22, 2021, 05:11:37 PM
well I may have overstated it or maybe not. Maybe woke-ism just isn't addressing things but maybe it won't matter in the end. We live in a world where systems have failed us on a colossal level. The increase of wages in the poorest places from 1$ a day to 2$ is hailed as some kind of great progress in world poverty whereas huge inequality is seen really as normal. It's an obscene level of grafting from corporations and ultra-wealthy. Environmental destruction continues at alarming rates and when we pass the point of no return, we won't even know it. I do think our systems, education for one, are shockingly un-creative and that young people are handed a world that is fait accompli. Here in Japan, no one questions the order and people are basically serving institutions and bureaucracies. Maybe this woke track is just an understandable blind fumbling for some kind of answer. Good luck in Massachusetts. I think for many people in the world, things aren't looking up. I'm always in the market for a more positive outlook though.

Wish I knew how to repair the wealth imbalance in the US. Clearly it is an obscenity, but if there is an easy path to decency and fairness, it is hidden from me.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on May 22, 2021, 08:38:01 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 22, 2021, 06:38:32 PM
Wish I knew how to repair the wealth imbalance in the US. Clearly it is an obscenity, but if there is an easy path to decency and fairness, it is hidden from me.
Me too!
Quote from: greg on May 22, 2021, 06:21:37 PM
Oh, come on. Didn't you know that CEO's of multi-million dollar companies only ever cared about LGBT and BLM?

(http://files.spazioweb.it/51/f3/51f3033a-525d-4a4a-a77d-e53cf63b1db6.jpg)


I'd imagine a racial narrative for the cause of class disparity would be something they prefer, rather than an economic one, as worshippers of the dollar. Even if it's not rooted in truth. Money is the only truth to them.
And it requires no actual change to the system, it's just kind words to appease the "lower class" of people so they don't ask for higher wages. Being anti-union but pro-woke at the same time, sounds genuine, right?  :P
quite a game they're running!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on May 22, 2021, 08:43:58 PM
Wyoming state senator running against Cheney for House seat reveals he impregnated 14-year-old when he was 18 (https://edition.cnn.com/2021/05/22/politics/anthony-bouchard-wyoming-14-year-old/index.html)

"A Republican Wyoming state senator who's running against US Rep. Liz Cheney for her House seat told a local newspaper he impregnated a 14-year-old girl when he was 18-years-old after he referenced the incident during a Facebook Live stream.

Anthony Bouchard told the Casper Star-Tribune newspaper on Thursday he married the girl after she turned 15 when they were both living in Florida.

He said they were able to get married at the time because under Florida law, a judge could approve the marriage if a pregnancy was involved and a parent consented. The state of Florida put a ban on child marriage into law in 2018, with some narrow exceptions for 17-year-olds.

The news came after he jumped on Facebook Live earlier Thursday to disclose this part of his life because he was made aware of a "political opposition research company" and unnamed reporter who were investigating him.

"It was a story when I was young, two teenagers, girl gets pregnant, you've heard those stories before," he said in the Facebook Live video. "She was a little younger than me, so it's like Romeo and Juliet story. A lot of pressure, pressure to abort a baby. I'm going to tell you, I wasn't going to do it."[...]


and from a different article:

"However, their "Romeo and Juliet story" ended tragically as they got divorced and Frances took her own life at the age of 20. Their son Tony Raymond Bouchard Jr, now 36, was brought up by Bouchard. The younger Bouchard is currently facing charges of sodomy by use of force, forcible oral copulation, sexual penetration by a foreign object, force and violence, and false imprisonment by violence on a 51-year-old female victim. He will be tried at the Tulare County Superior Court later this year."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on May 23, 2021, 03:56:20 AM
Quote from: greg on May 22, 2021, 06:21:37 PM
Oh, come on. Didn't you know that CEO's of multi-million dollar companies only ever cared about LGBT and BLM?
...
I'd imagine a racial narrative for the cause of class disparity would be something they prefer, rather than an economic one, as worshippers of the dollar. Even if it's not rooted in truth. Money is the only truth to them.
And it requires no actual change to the system, it's just kind words to appease the "lower class" of people so they don't ask for higher wages. Being anti-union but pro-woke at the same time, sounds genuine, right?  :P

Humm ... well that's a very good point, IMO.  It's been my opinion for some time that the greater problem in the USA is economic disparity and that racial problem is often pressed as a distraction from the greater problem (-- which is by no means to say that there isn't systemic racism that disadvantages so many).

Capitalism has a natural tendency to concentrate wealth and power as demonstrated by the course of history.  The more laisse faire the instance, the more pronounced that tendency, the USA being a particularly bad example in that regard.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on May 24, 2021, 06:10:14 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on May 23, 2021, 03:56:20 AM
Humm ... well that's a very good point, IMO.  It's been my opinion for some time that the greater problem in the USA is economic disparity and that racial problem is often pressed as a distraction from the greater problem (-- which is by no means to say that there isn't systemic racism that disadvantages so many).
I have suspicions that the focus on identity politics started because of the Great Recession.

There was a video I saw a long time ago where during Occupy Wall Street, some group was having a bunch of different people speak, one at a time, and this guy said that "x colored, x gender person who has the least privilege gets the right to speak first." Never have I seen any video or anything in real life, before that time, where people acted that way.

But that sort of thing sure divides the masses to where their main focus is on themselves, rather than organizing together to focus on attacking rich people.

They want to keep you down, even with the stock market/crypto, they are known to use the media to push out articles that scaremonger poor people to sell their stocks so they can buy at a low rate and then sell high.

So it wouldn't be surprising if they played some part in media attention being focused on something that is a distraction from economic issues, it's all power games.
(though admittedly it is hard to tell exactly the role, it's pretty much speculation)


Quote from: Fëanor on May 23, 2021, 03:56:20 AM
Capitalism has a natural tendency to concentrate wealth and power as demonstrated by the course of history.  The more laisse faire the instance, the more pronounced that tendency, the USA being a particularly bad example in that regard.
More free markets are good, but in general, things work work counter-intuitively in certain ways.

If you want to get sleep, you can't just focus on sleeping whenever. You have to be awake, doing some exercise and fatiguing things will get you there. If you want to wake up with energy, you have to have a good sleep first.

So everything is in a state of transition, capitalism is a game, and once the game is played and the winners win, it is no longer a game anymore. Oppression inevitably occurs. (Same with power vacuums/government). You need to keep going, so what may be necessary is breaking up monopolies, or something (very much anti-free market) in order to perpetuate the free market. (Or, hopefully, as technology advances, more free markets aka "games" can open up, so the new generation has a shot at winning them and not being oppressed by the old generation economically).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 25, 2021, 01:41:58 PM
Prosecutor in Trump criminal probe convenes grand jury to hear evidence, weigh potential charges. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/trump-investigation-grand-jury/2021/05/25/5f47911c-bcca-11eb-83e3-0ca705a96ba4_story.html)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on May 26, 2021, 07:06:11 AM
Quote from: greg on May 24, 2021, 06:10:14 AM
I have suspicions that the focus on identity politics started because of the Great Recession.

There was a video I saw a long time ago where during Occupy Wall Street, some group was having a bunch of different people speak, one at a time, and this guy said that "x colored, x gender person who has the least privilege gets the right to speak first." Never have I seen any video or anything in real life, before that time, where people acted that way.

But that sort of thing sure divides the masses to where their main focus is on themselves, rather than organizing together to focus on attacking rich people.

Seriously? The focus on identity politics is a result of the right systematically attacking over decades the human, civil, and constitutional rights of people based on race, sexual preference, and gender identity. They fought tooth and nail to keep gays from having marriage equality, the republicans are currently doing everything they can to suppress the voting rights of US citizens based on race, to deny medical care for trans people, and to smear peaceful protestors by drawing a moral equivalence between them and insurrectionsits, blacks have been purposely disenfranchised economically for four centuries. Get a frickin clue: When you relentlessly attack people based on identity you force them to organize and resist the attacks in those terms. In my opinion, it's vile to blame the victims.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on May 26, 2021, 07:33:22 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on May 26, 2021, 07:06:11 AM
Seriously? The focus on identity politics is a result of the right systematically attacking over decades the human, civil, and constitutional rights of people based on race, sexual preference, and gender identity. They fought tooth and nail to keep gays from having marriage equality, the republicans are currently doing everything they can to suppress the voting rights of US citizens based on race, to deny medical care for trans people, and to smear peaceful protestors by drawing a moral equivalence between them and insurrectionsits, blacks have been purposely disenfranchised economically for four centuries. Get a frickin clue: When you relentlessly attack people based on identity you force them to organize and resist the attacks in those terms. In my opinion, it's vile to blame the victims.
Is "identitarianism" the answer to all that ills us? I think good people can disagree and every claim should be challenged rather than blindly accepted. Some of what you say is more obviously true, but...
- "to deny medical care for trans people" - It's not wrong to ask a few questions about an issue that was very marginal until recently but has now become a main point in politics. What kind of medical care is being denied and to whom and where? Maybe you're right but I'd like to know more.
- "blacks have been purposely disenfranchised economically for four centuries" - it's also such a complicated issue. Has there been progress on this issue in the last 20 years? What is causing the current disenfranchisement as you see it? Do you accept critical race theory as the only framing and answer or could there be other solutions? Are there "good people" who disagree
with the current trend like "critical theories"?
I think you are right about voting rights and the "long opposition", including the likes of Obama and Clinton, to marriage equality. I'm not sure why gender identity is such a hugely important issue these days - not that every individual suffering isn't important.
I too tend to see the identity and critical theories taught academia and now overtaking schools and businesses as a big distraction from social and political progress. Coke is saying, "hey, look over here; don't look there..." 

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 26, 2021, 08:50:38 AM
Quote from: milk on May 26, 2021, 07:33:22 AM
I think you are right about voting rights and the "long opposition", including the likes of Obama and Clinton, to marriage equality. I'm not sure why gender identity is such a hugely important issue these days - not that every individual suffering isn't important.

American society has a long history of being squeamish about, yet obsessed with, sex.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 26, 2021, 09:26:31 AM
Quote from: milk on May 26, 2021, 07:33:22 AM
Is "identitarianism" the answer to all that ills us?


     No, the answers will come about from political pressure on Dems to implement Dem policy on the economy and social justice. The identitarian ultras occupy the same space in the discourse as radicals always do. Occasionally a good idea will be one they have. It won't slow change down much that the ultras offend people who are offended almost as much by cutting taxes on working people.

     The big fight is always about net spending for growth and fixing problems vs. net spending to fatten accounts stuffed with the comatose dollars of the wealthy.

     What are these extra dollars for? Wasn't Will Rogers right that dollars for expansion end up with the wealthy anyway, and wouldn't it be better for them to do good for everyone as they trickle up instead of only the fortunate few when they kind of don't trickle down? The idea wasn't even radical when Rogers had it. It goes back as far as W. J. Bryan.

Mr. Hoover was an engineer. He knew that water trickles down. Put it uphill and let it go and it will reach the driest little spot. But he didn't know that money trickled up. Give it to the people at the bottom and the people at the top will have it before night, anyhow. But it will at least have passed through the poor fellows hands. - Will Rogers
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on May 26, 2021, 11:07:50 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on May 26, 2021, 07:06:11 AM
Seriously? The focus on identity politics is a result of the right systematically attacking over decades the human, civil, and constitutional rights of people based on race, sexual preference, and gender identity. They fought tooth and nail to keep gays from having marriage equality, the republicans are currently doing everything they can to suppress the voting rights of US citizens based on race, to deny medical care for trans people, and to smear peaceful protestors by drawing a moral equivalence between them and insurrectionsits, blacks have been purposely disenfranchised economically for four centuries. Get a frickin clue: When you relentlessly attack people based on identity you force them to organize and resist the attacks in those terms. In my opinion, it's vile to blame the victims.
Too many things mentioned to comment on all of them, so won't go into whether it's accurate or not....

but focusing on these things, you can lose sight of the big picture. People's life experiences are more different based on how much money they came from, moreso than their sexual orientation, gender, race, etc. (maybe with the exception of really bad mental illnesses) But that became the predominant focus, meanwhile these wealthy people destroyed an entire generation economically, which affected everyone regardless of their group identity. And they are laughing at the commoners' squabbles. Divide and conquer is the way, after all, to maintain power.

Also, IIRC in the 2000's there was not story after story about police brutality inciting riots and protests, until it started in 2012 with the Trayvon Martin story. And that type of story has become a trend since then. It's not us who are profiting off of that, that's for sure.


(to be clear, people can group up and try to get what they want, many of the fights are already over (gay marriage, etc.) so not saying they shouldn't do that if they wish, but that it shouldn't be the main focus of discourse compared to things like corruption of the wealthy affecting the masses)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 26, 2021, 04:53:38 PM
The Republican Party right now is obsessed with competitive victimhood. It's the thematic messaging that captures the Trumpian hearts and minds and MTG is practically a grandmaster at it. Just like Trump. And as for facing real consequences from the Good Republicans? Well, as long as MTG stays on Trump's good side, she'll be protected.

The obvious comparison here is Liz Cheney. When Cheney forthrightly answered basic questions about whether she believes Trump should be the leader of the Republican Party after inciting an insurrection—"no"—she was deemed "off message" and ousted from her leadership post.

The calculation is easy and it doesn't have anything to do with truth or falsity. Marjorie Taylor Greene and her insane grievance politics represent a very large bloc of Republican voters.

Who Has The Power? (https://thebulwark.com/who-has-the-power/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on May 27, 2021, 03:05:53 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 26, 2021, 04:53:38 PM
The Republican Party right now is obsessed with competitive victimhood. It's the thematic messaging that captures the Trumpian hearts and minds and MTG is practically a grandmaster at it. Just like Trump. And as for facing real consequences from the Good Republicans? Well, as long as MTG stays on Trump's good side, she'll be protected.

The obvious comparison here is Liz Cheney. When Cheney forthrightly answered basic questions about whether she believes Trump should be the leader of the Republican Party after inciting an insurrection—"no"—she was deemed "off message" and ousted from her leadership post.

The calculation is easy and it doesn't have anything to do with truth or falsity. Marjorie Taylor Greene and her insane grievance politics represent a very large bloc of Republican voters.

Who Has The Power? (https://thebulwark.com/who-has-the-power/)

When substantial numbers prefer lies & conspiracy theories and politicians are willing to promote them, cynically or otherwise, because "Democracy doesn't matter as long as our side wins", then a country is effed in the arse.

As I've said for the last 40 years, the threat to American democracy isn't Communism, socialism, or the "extreme Left", it is fascism.  I believe this more & more with every month that passes.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 27, 2021, 05:19:25 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on May 27, 2021, 03:05:53 AM
When substantial numbers prefer lies & conspiracy theories and politicians are willing to promote them, cynically or otherwise, because "Democracy doesn't matter as long as our side wins", then a country is effed in the arse.

As I've said for the last 40 years, the threat to American democracy isn't Communism, socialism, or the "extreme Left", it is fascism.  I believe this more & more with every month that passes.

Wish I might refute that, but I cannot.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 27, 2021, 06:57:56 AM
     It's Time to Be Worried About Inflation (https://thebulwark.com/its-time-to-be-worried-about-inflation/)

Whereas the American Jobs Plan envisages close to a $2 trillion increase in public spending over the next eight years, it calls for collecting the revenues to finance that expenditure over a 15-year period. This implies that over the next decade, the Jobs Plan would add an estimated $1 trillion to the country's public debt.

     For libraservatives it's always time to worry, and there's no doubt that when large increases in government spending are proposed, people propose a matching set of inflation worries, or what they think is a match. Take the above, which tries to turn spending over 8 years into a worry about accumulated public debt. On its face, I don't see a worry. After all the debt is the part taxes don't pay, not the part they do. That leaves the money with us, saved instead of canceled. That's what the debt is for. The national debt only reveals its secrets from an analysis of its function.

     We do see some inflation. Given how the economy is revving up it should be expected that bottlenecks should exist as jobs and workers are mismatched. About the pent up demand, it should cause inflation to spike until production meets it. The notion that the economy should be squished in anticipation of economic growing pains is classic conventional thinkery and responsible for decades of low growth and middle class stagnation. Do we really want to sabotage this cycle like the last one?

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 27, 2021, 08:14:44 AM

     Another thing to keep in mind is that it's always the "largest tax cut/increase in history". It's always the largest spending increase, the highest deficits, the biggest debt total since the dawn of time, or since WWII which is almost the same thing.

     But, but.....not only did the world not end from the Big Number Palooza after WWII, we got the greatest expansion of mass prosperity in human history. First we had a serious bout of inflation in the late '40s as the economy suffered through production bottlenecks during the transition from the war economy to peacetime conditions. The huge pent up demand from enforced wartime savings (the other side of the wartime debt) first created inflation and then growth as the economy adjusted to meet demand. Does this sound familiar yet?

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on May 27, 2021, 08:30:57 AM
All the news lately about the "ohh, maybe it did come from a lab" lately has me amused.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 27, 2021, 09:04:43 AM
Quote from: greg on May 27, 2021, 08:30:57 AM
All the news lately about the "ohh, maybe it did come from a lab" lately has me amused.

     The controversy was not about whether the virus escaped from a lab or not. The controversy was about the Trumpist claim that the virus did escape from the lab because Chicoms lie about many things. You investigate because you don't know. Trump never wanted to know stuff, he wanted to say stuff. Since the truth matters we should investigate the claim.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on May 27, 2021, 09:30:51 AM
Quote from: drogulus on May 27, 2021, 06:57:56 AM
     It's Time to Be Worried About Inflation (https://thebulwark.com/its-time-to-be-worried-about-inflation/)

Whereas the American Jobs Plan envisages close to a $2 trillion increase in public spending over the next eight years, it calls for collecting the revenues to finance that expenditure over a 15-year period. This implies that over the next decade, the Jobs Plan would add an estimated $1 trillion to the country's public debt.

     For libraservatives it's always time to worry, and there's no doubt that when large increases in government spending are proposed, people propose a matching set of inflation worries, or what they think is a match. Take the above, which tries to turn spending over 8 years into a worry about accumulated public debt. On its face, I don't see a worry. After all the debt is the part taxes don't pay, not the part they do. That leaves the money with us, saved instead of canceled. That's what the debt is for. The national debt only reveals its secrets from an analysis of its function.

     We do see some inflation. Given how the economy is revving up it should be expected that bottlenecks should exist as jobs and workers are mismatched. About the pent up demand, it should cause inflation to spike until production meets it. The notion that the economy should be squished in anticipation of economic growing pains is classic conventional thinkery and responsible for decades of low growth and middle class stagnation. Do we really want to sabotage this cycle like the last one?

A little more inflation would be alright I suppose -- after all, inflation only hurts middle class retirees and the like with modest saving, not the working man or, needless to say, the Rich.

The USA and other countries like Canada need to tax the Rich harder;  higher income taxes with a lot fewer exemptions plus maybe even a short-term wealth tax.  The Rich tend not to invest unless there is Demand, but regardless they are happy to take the money and buy existing assets which causes real estate bubbles, etc., but doesn't add to productive capacity.

So tax the Rich and don't worry.  Put the money into infrastructure;  lots of the money spent there is going to trickle up to the Rich anyway but helping workers and the nation along the way.  (Check your Will Rogers quote which is so true.)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 27, 2021, 10:49:14 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on May 27, 2021, 09:30:51 AM


The USA and other countries like Canada need to tax the Rich harder;  higher income taxes with a lot fewer exemptions plus maybe even a short-term wealth tax.  The Rich tend not to invest unless there is Demand, but regardless they are happy to take the money and buy existing assets which causes real estate bubbles, etc., but doesn't add to productive capacity.

So tax the Rich and don't worry.  Put the money into infrastructure;  lots of the money spent there is going to trickle up to the Rich anyway but helping workers and the nation along the way.  (Check your Will Rogers quote which is so true.)

     There are reasons to tax the rich, but not because their money can be used to raise demand. What I have in mind is a more productive tax-side fiscal balance where less of the burden falls on low to middle earners, so a combination of cuts lower down and increases at the top means money does more work before it gets to its natural home at the top. The idea is that the rich get richer more slowly and everyone else catches up in an economy designed to grow faster. But no, we don't need the money to come from the rich. Taxes don't do that.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 27, 2021, 10:49:46 AM
Quote from: drogulus on May 27, 2021, 09:04:43 AM
     The controversy was not about whether the virus escaped from a lab or not. The controversy was about the Trumpist claim that the virus did escape Trump never wanted to know stuff, he wanted to say stuff.

And greg is much the same.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on May 27, 2021, 12:41:40 PM
Quote from: Fëanor on May 27, 2021, 03:05:53 AM
When substantial numbers prefer lies & conspiracy theories and politicians are willing to promote them, cynically or otherwise, because "Democracy doesn't matter as long as our side wins", then a country is effed in the arse.

As I've said for the last 40 years, the threat to American democracy isn't Communism, socialism, or the "extreme Left", it is fascism.  I believe this more & more with every month that passes.

Well, Fascism and Communism have a lot in common --- in many respects they are virtually indistinguishable...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on May 27, 2021, 01:57:48 PM
Quote from: drogulus on May 27, 2021, 09:04:43 AM
     The controversy was not about whether the virus escaped from a lab or not. The controversy was about the Trumpist claim that the virus did escape from the lab because Chicoms lie about many things. You investigate because you don't know. Trump never wanted to know stuff, he wanted to say stuff. Since the truth matters we should investigate the claim.
I don't care what Trump thought about it. But the media sure did.
And yeah, I agree completely with that "Since the truth matters we should investigate the claim," that's the general best approach to take to everything, especially when it comes to ideologies.


Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 27, 2021, 10:49:46 AM
And greg is much the same.
Lol. That's funny, being directed at an introvert who spends more time looking up stuff online than actually talking to people.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 27, 2021, 03:44:37 PM
Quote from: greg on May 27, 2021, 01:57:48 PM
I don't care what Trump thought about it. But the media sure did.


     Trump was President. It was a big story. Note that Trump was peddling false narratives that 1) the virus was a Chinese bio-weapon and 2) it was no big deal, both a "kung" and a "flu"!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on May 27, 2021, 04:21:43 PM
Quote from: drogulus on May 27, 2021, 03:44:37 PM
     Trump was President. It was a big story. Note that Trump was peddling false narratives that 1) the virus was a Chinese bio-weapon and 2) it was no big deal, both a "kung" and a "flu"!
Well, sure, any of those narratives deserves criticism.
But anything to do with lab leak theories one year ago was deemed a conspiracy theory. Now, all of a sudden, it isn't.
It's also possible to look at the clues and make up one's own mind, rather than listening to the MSM (and be a year behind the curve), or listen to Trump (god forbid).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 27, 2021, 04:49:22 PM
Quote from: greg on May 27, 2021, 04:21:43 PM

But anything to do with lab leak theories one year ago was deemed a conspiracy theory. Now, all of a sudden, it isn't.


     It is a conspiracy theory. It might also be the case that there was a lab accident. There is no all of a sudden about it.

Quote from: greg on May 27, 2021, 04:21:43 PM


It's also possible to look at the clues and make up one's own mind, rather than listening to the MSM (and be a year behind the curve), or listen to Trump (god forbid).

     It's listening to the MSM that causes me to conclude that animal to human transmission occurred elsewhere, in part because no evidence has been introduced that the lab had that particular virus, and colleagues of the Wuhan virologists don't think they did. That lab doesn't keep secrets about the viruses it studies. It looks like a nonexistent non-barking dog. However, though that's not the most likely explanation, it's possible the lab had the virus and didn't tell anyone. It's not likely in my view, but stranger things are sometimes true, so we should investigate that possibility.

     I don't get why you think getting news from the MSM through the intermediary of your favored sources is an advantage. It doesn't seem to be producing any results from what you say.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on May 27, 2021, 05:01:15 PM
Quote from: greg on May 27, 2021, 04:21:43 PM
Well, sure, any of those narratives deserves criticism.
But anything to do with lab leak theories one year ago was deemed a conspiracy theory. Now, all of a sudden, it isn't.
It's also possible to look at the clues and make up one's own mind, rather than listening to the MSM (and be a year behind the curve), or listen to Trump (god forbid).

No, it was deemed "not where the evidence currently available is pointing". And people weren't merely following the "MSM" they were following scientists and experts speaking via the MSM. I don't know what you think "look at the clues and make up one's own mind" means, when the experts know far more than you and can interpret the data in ways you can not. Who were you following who had better information?

Also worth reiterating that no new evidence has entered the public domain for you to be crowing that your personal belief has been vindicated. The investigation has been widened to reconsider the possibility.

And hypothetically if it turns out it did originate as an escape from the lab I'd be somewhat sympathetic to the Chinese spin "we couldn't give this information to Trump who would have used it recklessly and cynically and would have only compounded the crisis"

edit: (x-posted with drogulus)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on May 28, 2021, 04:52:33 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on May 27, 2021, 05:01:15 PM
No, it was deemed "not where the evidence currently available is pointing". And people weren't merely following the "MSM" they were following scientists and experts speaking via the MSM. I don't know what you think "look at the clues and make up one's own mind" means, when the experts know far more than you and can interpret the data in ways you can not. Who were you following who had better information?

Also worth reiterating that no new evidence has entered the public domain for you to be crowing that your personal belief has been vindicated. The investigation has been widened to reconsider the possibility.

And hypothetically if it turns out it did originate as an escape from the lab I'd be somewhat sympathetic to the Chinese spin "we couldn't give this information to Trump who would have used it recklessly and cynically and would have only compounded the crisis"

edit: (x-posted with drogulus)
Wow! That's really amazing. I mean the idea that China might have lied and failed to warn the world, that this gets your sympathy in any scenario is amazing. I have to agree with Greg. Now, some of the top virologists in the world are saying it's possible that this was a lab leak. I too poo-pooed this as a crazy conspiracy theory (as did segments of the media) and a lot of that was due to trump. Yes, it's understandable because trump always said so many stupid and crazy things. I think if people dug a little they might have been more critical of the arguments at the time and who was making them and why. Fauci is involved in the research at Wuhan, something I also dismissed as too obvious to be meaningful. I do think we need to go with the consensus in science but we need to make sure there really is a strong consensus and always be open to political factors. Obviously, in hindsight, scientists didn't have a strong basis for accepting China's story and there were some real warning signs that there just wasn't enough science there yet. I think trump-hatred definitely fed into what was being believed last year as opposed to now. This is partially trump's fault for crying wolf all the time. I don't know where this disease came from but it seems scientists do not have a basis for strong confidence either. Maybe we will never know. Thank China for that also and don't excuse it!   
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 28, 2021, 06:11:34 AM
Quote from: milk on May 28, 2021, 04:52:33 AM
Now, some of the top virologists in the world are saying it's possible that this was a lab leak.

     When a scientist says something is possible it does not mean probable. That story hasn't changed.

     The investigation exists to find out what happened and to remove an obstacle to international cooperation on pandemic threats coming from China and other Asian countries. This is too important to allow Trumpist hatesplaining to corrupt decision making, whether there was anything amiss at the lab or not.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on May 28, 2021, 07:31:08 AM
Quote from: Florestan on May 27, 2021, 12:41:40 PM
Well, Fascism and Communism have a lot in common --- in many respects they are virtually indistinguishable...

They are alike in that both tend to be totalitarian;  they are very different in other respects.

It seems to me that many Americans ignorantly associate any degree of socialism with Soviet-style Communism.

Soviet Communism included both (a) totalitarianism, and (b) complete central planning of the economy.  I'm not aware of any prominent American politicians who advocate for either of these things.  However some American conservatives delight in insinuating or frankly accusing progressive Democrats of these wanting these things -- that is a slander.

OTOH, the alt-Right panders misinformation, conspiracy theories, and the "Big Lie" of the stolen election.  These things plus district gerrymandering, unrestricted campaign contributions, and voter restrictions, are a direct attack on democracy and pave the road to dictatorship whence totalitarianism.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 28, 2021, 08:34:08 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on May 28, 2021, 07:31:08 AM
They are alike in that both tend to be totalitarian;  they are very different in other respects.

It seems to me that many Americans ignorantly associate any degree of socialism with Soviet-style Communism.


     They hate liberal democracy. Communists and fascists treat liberal democrats and socialists as their most dangerous enemies and they are right to do so.

     American conservatives have sponsored this confusion for their own motives. Do they believe their own propaganda? I don't think it is a requirement that they do so long as they can put on a good show.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on May 28, 2021, 09:10:18 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on May 27, 2021, 05:01:15 PM
Who were you following who had better information?
You remember that one video I shared a year ago that you dismissed as seeming "conspiracy-like?" That one.
Precisely because this guy is fluent in Chinese and had the information that the Chinese government was trying to cover up. And if the CCP is known for anything, it's cover-ups and whataboutism.
That was the meaning of "look at the clues and make up your own mind," the clues were in that video.
There was never any evidence that it came from the wet market, but what a coincidence with the lab being there studying the viruses at that exact time, and researchers dying from it. And because of that, I remember being dismissed by Karl as a conspiracy theorist ("coincidences? that's how conspiracy theorists think").
MSM may be right or wrong. Source, or experts, is not necessarily equal to truth. Good to listen to them in general as a rule of thumb, though (I have always believed them on the idea of it originating in animals and not created in the lab, because it seems like scientists could be more certain of something like that).



Quote from: milk on May 28, 2021, 04:52:33 AM
I think trump-hatred definitely fed into what was being believed last year as opposed to now. This is partially trump's fault for crying wolf all the time.
Absolutely. People gotta look past Trump. And also, he could helped by closing his blabbering mouth a bit more.



Quote from: drogulus on May 27, 2021, 04:49:22 PM
     It is a conspiracy theory. It might also be the case that there was a lab accident. There is no all of a sudden about it.
The only conspiracy theory I'm aware of is the one where people say it was deliberately created (from scratch) in the lab. Which I never believed.
Lab leak, lab accident, those are the same thing to be clear.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 28, 2021, 09:16:32 AM
     Prices up 3.6 percent annually in April, reflecting upward trend, but policymakers say it's temporary (https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/05/28/inflation-pce-consumer-spending/)

     I see. The inflation is an "upward trend", which is a reference to a theory of inflation that the world constantly refutes, and it's also said to be temporary, which is a reference to how shitty the theory is when you try to make predictions based on it.

     The theory states something to the effect that inflation will cause an upward spiral of rising prices such that price A will raise price B which will raise price A more, making it necessary to break the spiral by breaking the economy into deflation as a cure.

     What the world shows is that inflation is like a rock thrown into a pond that produces ripples that decay, so that unless you keep throwing rocks the inflation subsides to the base level without creating a need for a "reserve army of the unemployed".

     To counter the unfortunate intrusion of facts about the world into inflation theory you will hear arguments about inflation "expectations", a more easily manipulable faux variable than the real thing, or "monetary inflation", which amounts to including inflation that doesn't happen but "should" in the mix. Now you can get whatever result you want.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on May 28, 2021, 09:54:46 AM
Quote from: milk on May 28, 2021, 04:52:33 AM
Wow! That's really amazing. I mean the idea that China might have lied and failed to warn the world, that this gets your sympathy in any scenario is amazing.

Amazing is an understatement. The idea that because of implacable hatred for one person someone would feel sympathetic to a totalitarian government which might have lied to the whole world and deliberately kept secret the leak of a virus which subsequently killed three-and-a-half million people and still counting is simply mind-boggling.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 28, 2021, 11:11:44 AM

     U.S. Is Said to Have Unexamined Intel to Pore Over on Virus's Origin (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/27/us/politics/coronavirus-origins-intelligence.html)

One allied nation passed on information that three workers in the Wuhan virological laboratory were hospitalized with serious flulike symptoms in the autumn of 2019. The information about the sickened workers is considered important, but officials cautioned that it did not constitute evidence that they caught the virus at the laboratory — they may have brought it there.

      That's one explanation, and has immediate plausibility if it turns out to be true that people at the lab got sick. They got sick the same way other people in Wuhan did. The virus didn't leak out from the lab, it leaked in.

      One of the things China may be trying to cover up is that they don't know what happened. In a dictatorship information doesn't freely flow up, and it appears the Wuhan bosses didn't want to deliver bad news to the national leadership.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on May 28, 2021, 05:23:35 PM
Quote from: Florestan on May 28, 2021, 09:54:46 AM
Amazing is an understatement. The idea that because of implacable hatred for one person someone would feel sympathetic to a totalitarian government which might have lied to the whole world and deliberately kept secret the leak of a virus which subsequently killed three-and-a-half million people and still counting is simply mind-boggling.

Yeah, thanks. That was exactly the reaction I would have expected from you. What I would have liked is for China to have been transparent and asked and allowed world disease experts to go and test wherever they needed and report and advise without censorship.

My hypothetical upthread is modeled not on my "implacable hatred for one person", but on trying to imagine how the Chinese government might view coming clean to a tantrum throwing toddler with a nuclear arsenal who has already been saber-rattling about China and who would act geopolitically with only whatever polled well with his racist base.

In this scenario if knowledge of the virus was known worldwide from the time Wuhan went into quarantine I can easily imagine China's attitude if they knew it was a lab escape especially toward the Trump USA being that providing that fact wont create common cause for a solution but rather treated cynically as at best a political opportunity and at worst a pretext for some form of war.

Now you try to imagine: what would Trump have done differently had it been know this started as a lab escape? Listened to the experts and followed their advise and let them advise the public? Really: tell me what you imagine.

For a bonus imagine this: how transparent would the US government, and especially the Trump government, have been about a government-run lab escape as the source of an outbreak?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on May 28, 2021, 05:38:13 PM
Quote from: greg on May 28, 2021, 09:10:18 AM
You remember that one video I shared a year ago that you dismissed as seeming "conspiracy-like?" That one.
Precisely because this guy is fluent in Chinese and had the information that the Chinese government was trying to cover up. And if the CCP is known for anything, it's cover-ups and whataboutism.
That was the meaning of "look at the clues and make up your own mind," the clues were in that video.
There was never any evidence that it came from the wet market, but what a coincidence with the lab being there studying the viruses at that exact time, and researchers dying from it. And because of that, I remember being dismissed by Karl as a conspiracy theorist ("coincidences? that's how conspiracy theorists think").
MSM may be right or wrong. Source, or experts, is not necessarily equal to truth. Good to listen to them in general as a rule of thumb, though (I have always believed them on the idea of it originating in animals and not created in the lab, because it seems like scientists could be more certain of something like that).


"That one video". Okay.

Did Covid come from a Wuhan lab? What we know so far (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/27/did-covid-come-from-a-wuhan-lab-what-we-know-so-far)

I especially liked "Many aspects of Wuhan lab leak story have echoes of the search for WMD in the run-up to the Iraq war in 2003 which included efforts to "stove pipe" intelligence analysis to fit the operating theory.Then as now, experts (then weapons inspectors also under the aegis of a UN body) were sent into a highly obstructive environment amid a highly politicised debate. Leaks of dubious intelligence – some of it provided by third party countries like the infamous Curveball claims – were reported without sufficient scepticism and expert warnings sidelined."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 28, 2021, 06:06:56 PM
Quote from: drogulus on May 28, 2021, 06:11:34 AM
     When a scientist says something is possible it does not mean probable. That story hasn't changed.

And conspiracy theorists strive on mapping "possible" onto "gotta be true!"
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 28, 2021, 06:09:57 PM
Quote from: greg on May 28, 2021, 09:10:18 AM
You remember that one video I shared a year ago that you dismissed as seeming "conspiracy-like?" That one.

At times you are unwittingly amusing, you know.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on May 29, 2021, 02:01:21 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on May 28, 2021, 05:23:35 PM
Yeah, thanks. That was exactly the reaction I would have expected from you.

Another posted reacted along the same lines long before I did.

QuoteMy hypothetical upthread is modeled not on my "implacable hatred for one person", but on trying to imagine how the Chinese government might view coming clean to a tantrum throwing toddler with a nuclear arsenal who has already been saber-rattling about China and who would act geopolitically with only whatever polled well with his racist base.

In this scenario if knowledge of the virus was known worldwide from the time Wuhan went into quarantine I can easily imagine China's attitude if they knew it was a lab escape especially toward the Trump USA being that providing that fact wont create common cause for a solution but rather treated cynically as at best a political opportunity and at worst a pretext for some form of war.

Now you try to imagine: what would Trump have done differently had it been know this started as a lab escape? Listened to the experts and followed their advise and let them advise the public? Really: tell me what you imagine.

Oh, yeah, I'm pretty sure he'd have nuked Beijing --- and Moscow, just in case.  ;D

QuoteFor a bonus imagine this: how transparent would the US government, and especially the Trump government, have been about a government-run lab escape as the source of an outbreak?

Whataboutism.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on May 29, 2021, 02:05:35 AM
I don't want your knee-jerk easy sarcasm. I want you to actually consider the questions.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on May 29, 2021, 02:37:05 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on May 29, 2021, 02:05:35 AM
I don't want your knee-jerk easy sarcasm. I want you to actually consider the questions.

I gave them all the consideration they warranted and answered accordingly.

Quote from: SimonNZ on May 28, 2021, 05:23:35 PM
What I would have liked is for China to have been transparent and asked and allowed world disease experts to go and test wherever they needed and report and advise without censorship.

Had they behaved that way, they'd have had the higher moral ground over any subsequent Trump hostile rhetoric and policies, and undoubtedly the full support of the international community.

But then again, they simply couldn't have behaved that way, because transparency, openness and lack of censorship are antithetical to totalitarianism, which treats them as mortal ennemies (and rightly so).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on May 29, 2021, 02:41:17 AM
Quote from: Florestan on May 29, 2021, 02:37:05 AM
I gave them all the consideration they warranted and answered accordingly.


No. You dodged with lazy sarcasm.

Try answering without lazy sarcasm.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on May 29, 2021, 04:13:51 AM
JAMES LINDSAY:

Critical Race Theory...
believes racism is present in every aspect of life, every relationship, and every interaction and therefore has its advocates look for it everywhere
relies upon "interest convergence" (white people only give black people opportunities and freedoms when it is also in their own interests) and therefore doesn't trust any attempt to make racism better
is against free societies and wants to dismantle them and replace them with something its advocates control
only treats race issues as "socially constructed groups," so there are no individuals in Critical Race Theory
believes science, reason, and evidence are a "white" way of knowing and that storytelling and lived experience are a "black" alternative, which hurts everyone, especially black people
rejects all potential alternatives, like colorblindness, as forms of racism, making itself the only allowable game in town (which is totalitarian)
acts like anyone who disagrees with it must do so for racist and white supremacist reasons, even if those people are black (which is also totalitarian)
cannot be satisfied, so it becomes a kind of activist black hole that threatens to destroy everything it is introduced into

https://newdiscourses.com/2020/06/reasons-critical-race-theory-terrible-dealing-racism/ (https://newdiscourses.com/2020/06/reasons-critical-race-theory-terrible-dealing-racism/)

John McWhorter

THE ELECT: THE THREAT TO A PROGRESSIVE AMERICA FROM ANTI-BLACK ANTIRACISTS
My main aims will be:
1. to argue that this new ideology is actually a religion in all but name;
2. to argue that to understand it as a religion is to see coherence in what may seem like a welter of "crazy" or overblown behaviors;
3. to explore why this religion is so attractive to so many people;
4. to show that this religion is actively harmful to black people despite being intended as unprecedentedly "antiracist";
5. to show that a pragmatic, effective, liberal and even Democratic-friendly agenda for rescuing black America need not be founded on the tenets of this new religion;
6. to suggest ways to lessen the grip of this new religion on our public culture.


https://johnmcwhorter.substack.com/p/the-elect-neoracists-posing-as-antiracists
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on May 29, 2021, 05:04:20 AM
Quote from: milk on May 29, 2021, 04:13:51 AM
...
John McWhorter

THE ELECT: THE THREAT TO A PROGRESSIVE AMERICA FROM ANTI-BLACK ANTIRACISTS
My main aims will be:
1. to argue that this new ideology is actually a religion in all but name;
2. to argue that to understand it as a religion is to see coherence in what may seem like a welter of "crazy" or overblown behaviors;
3. to explore why this religion is so attractive to so many people;
4. to show that this religion is actively harmful to black people despite being intended as unprecedentedly "antiracist";
5. to show that a pragmatic, effective, liberal and even Democratic-friendly agenda for rescuing black America need not be founded on the tenets of this new religion;
6. to suggest ways to lessen the grip of this new religion on our public culture.


https://johnmcwhorter.substack.com/p/the-elect-neoracists-posing-as-antiracists

Yeah well racism is a natural tendency of humans since the Paleolithic to fear the other.  In the Paleolithic it was an aid to survival;  in today's world it's the opposite.  People need to evolve.

A thing that is exacerbating racism in America, (some other countries too), is that fact that median incomes have be stagnating for 35+ years.  When you're not getting ahead and fear your kids will be worse off than you, you feel dispossessed and thrash around for somebody to blame.

Unfortunately the American (White) lower-middle and working classes are irrationally blaming Blacks, Hispanics, et al. and the Democratic Party for "favoring"  minorities over white people.  For a start it would be great if Democrats and US politicians would start favoring the lower-middle and working classes -- regardless of color -- over the Rich.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 29, 2021, 06:06:42 AM

     The Chinese government is inclined to hide any bad news. The lower layers behave the same. Even in the absence of the impulse to lie to the outside world, the tendency to lie and conceal means it's likely that China is engaged in covering up something it doesn't completely understand.

     To me, it looks like Orange Former Guy told lies the Chinese suspected had truth in them. On this view, they wouldn't know. By now they may be covering up because that's the default mode. They aren't going to start behaving transparently just because for once the truth is on their side.

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on May 29, 2021, 06:48:33 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on May 29, 2021, 05:04:20 AM
Yeah well racism is a natural tendency of humans since the Paleolithic to fear the other.  In the Paleolithic it was an aid to survival;  in today's world it's the opposite.  People need to evolve.

A thing that is exacerbating racism in America, (some other countries too), is that fact that median incomes have be stagnating for 35+ years.  When you're not getting ahead and fear your kids will be worse off than you, you feel dispossessed and thrash around for somebody to blame.

Unfortunately the American (White) lower-middle and working classes are irrationally blaming Blacks, Hispanics, et al. and the Democratic Party for "favoring"  minorities over white people.  For a start it would be great if Democrats and US politicians would start favoring the lower-middle and working classes -- regardless of color -- over the Rich.
I'm with you!
People are so screwed-over and they're handed a world and told it can't be otherwise. It's pretty bleak.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 29, 2021, 06:56:12 AM
     As a tool to deny racial justice on a liberal humanist basis, Critical Race Theory might be of value, though the use of it would have ironic implications. Illiberal anti-racists and illiberal anti-anti-racists would together be launching an assault on liberalism just like fascists and communists have done in the past.

     McWhorter is standing up for an old fashioned brand of liberal reformism. He is astute:

Something must be understood: I do not mean that these people's ideology is "like" a religion. I seek no rhetorical snap in the comparison. I mean that it actually is a religion. A naïve anthropologist would see no difference in type between Mormonism and this new form of antiracism. Language is always imprecise, and thus we have traditionally restricted the word religion to certain ideologies founded in creation myths, guided by ancient texts, and requiring that one subscribe to certain beliefs beyond the reach of empirical experience. This, however, is an accident, just as it is that we call tomatoes vegetables rather than fruits. If we rolled the tape again, the word religion could easily apply as well to more secular and recently emerged ways of thinking. One of them is this extremist version of antiracism today.

     The closer forms of thought get to religion the worse they are. All you have to say about an idea is that "it's like a religion" and everyone knows exactly what you mean. It's never, never a compliment, even coming from a "true beliefer".

     What are you going to do with a guy like this?

     While we're at it, QAnon has become one of the largest religions in the country. This causes me to reflect on a common mistruth. It often said that people who believe nothing will believe anything. It turns out that the people who believe anything (and QAnon is as anything as you can get) are already primed to believe. Many are simultaneously evangelical Christians. If there are any former Eliminative Materialists among them, they're keeping their heads down. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/smiley.gif)

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on May 29, 2021, 07:14:29 AM
Quote from: drogulus on May 29, 2021, 06:56:12 AM
     As a tool to deny racial justice on a liberal humanist basis, Critical Race Theory might be of value, though the use of it would have ironic implications. Illiberal anti-racists and illiberal anti-anti-racists would together be launching an assault on liberalism just like fascists and communists have done in the past.

     McWhorter is standing up for an old fashioned brand of liberal reformism. He is astute:

Something must be understood: I do not mean that these people's ideology is "like" a religion. I seek no rhetorical snap in the comparison. I mean that it actually is a religion. A naïve anthropologist would see no difference in type between Mormonism and this new form of antiracism. Language is always imprecise, and thus we have traditionally restricted the word religion to certain ideologies founded in creation myths, guided by ancient texts, and requiring that one subscribe to certain beliefs beyond the reach of empirical experience. This, however, is an accident, just as it is that we call tomatoes vegetables rather than fruits. If we rolled the tape again, the word religion could easily apply as well to more secular and recently emerged ways of thinking. One of them is this extremist version of antiracism today.

     The closer forms of thought get to religion the worse they are. All you have to say about an idea is that "it's like a religion" and everyone knows exactly what you mean. It's never, never a compliment, even coming from a "true beliefer".

     What are you going to do with a guy like this?

     While we're at it, QAnon has become one of the largest religions in the country. This causes me to reflect on a common mistruth. It often said that people who believe nothing will believe anything. It turns out that the people who believe anything (and QAnon is as anything as you can get) are already primed to believe. Many are simultaneously evangelical Christians. If there are any former Eliminative Materialists among them, they're keeping their heads down. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/smiley.gif)


I've viewed several McWhorter linguistics courses on the Great Courses.  They were most enjoyable, informative and greatly enhanced by McWhorter's droll humor.

The world needs fewer believers, whether religionists, ideologists, or whatever;  it needs more skeptics and questioners, and more simply interested in the truth.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 29, 2021, 07:39:38 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on May 29, 2021, 07:14:29 AM


The world needs fewer believers, whether religionists, ideologists, or whatever;  it needs more skeptics and questioners, and more simply interested in the truth.

     Many people are operationally unbelievers without adhering to an expressed set of convictions on the subject. Pilots don't go beliefy at 30,000 feet, so planes can safely land, yet back on the ground they will rarely offer up anything like a philosophical basis for their behavior. People don't have to formalize their operational practice at the level of concepts. I do, as a kind of hobby.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 29, 2021, 08:15:17 AM

     Biden Banks on $3.6 Trillion Tax Hike on the Rich and Corporations (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/28/us/politics/tax-rising-on-rich-corporations.html?action=click&module=Well&pgtype=Homepage&section=US%20Politics)

     I don't think he's banking on a big tax increase. He wants what he can get in the way of tax relief on live money by way of taxing dead money harder. The tax cuts by way of credits are more important. The important thing is that the aggregate tax burden is shifted up however it's done. Increasing IRS efficiency at collecting taxes owed should relieve pressure to set rates higher. In any case, spending should proceed to the basis of real economy goals. If you spend more, more tax comes back. It's not all rates, rates, rates, golf, golf, golf...... (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/tongue.gif)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 29, 2021, 08:51:01 AM
Quote from: drogulus on May 29, 2021, 08:15:17 AMI don't think he's banking on a big tax increase. He wants what he can get in the way of tax relief on live money by way of taxing dead money harder.

Bingo.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on May 29, 2021, 03:17:10 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on May 28, 2021, 05:38:13 PM
"That one video". Okay.
There were a lot of clues in that video pointing to it the lab being the source, and it was the first video I'm aware of that revealed this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpQFCcSI0pU

From April 1, 2020...

this comment sums it up:
Quote1 year after this hypothesis was labeled "conspiracy theory" by the media, only now it is becoming mainstream...

A complete failure on the part of the MSM when one guy can get to the party a year earlier than everyone else.

Unfailingly trusting corporate media over individuals who sometimes don't have fancy titles or might have unorthodox careers or life experiences (but might have insider knowledge, and in this case, is an excellent bridge between the worlds of Chinese and English speakers) will sometimes get you this type of result.


Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 28, 2021, 06:09:57 PM
At times you are unwittingly amusing, you know.
Huh.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on May 29, 2021, 04:49:38 PM
Speaking both English and Mandarin isn't the rarity you seem to think it is. And all the worthy major news organizations will naturally employ people on the ground with this ability to research and report on a story like this. Obviously. And if you actually watched the reporting rather than dismissing it all sweepingly as "MSM" you'd now this. And you'd be seeing interviewees being given voice-over translations by the production (with their voice still able to be heard, lest anyone wants to try to claim they were mistranslated). Al Jazeera I think may be alone in giving non-English interviewees subtitles when they have time permitting to do so.

And this is to say nothing of the number of Chinese professionals who have learned English as a matter of course. All of which means no one needs some random Youtuber to be "the bridge".
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 29, 2021, 05:51:43 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on May 29, 2021, 04:49:38 PM
Speaking both English and Mandarin isn't the rarity you seem to think it is.

In so many respects, he suffers from tunnel-vision.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on May 29, 2021, 05:58:50 PM
Just heard on Jon Lovitt's podcast: "Joe Manchin is like a guy standing in front of a burning house with a fire hose asking permission of the arsonist to use the water."

and a nice turn of phrase I heard from Molly Jong-Fast's podcast yesterday: "Democrats keep bringing a stuffed animal to a knife fight."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 29, 2021, 08:43:45 PM


     
Quote from: greg on May 29, 2021, 03:17:10 PM

A complete failure on the part of the MSM when one guy can get to the party a year earlier than everyone else.



     It was Trump who congratulated the Chicoms for how they handled the virus, not the MSM. It was not a revelation to me or many other MSM addicts that China was not like Western country. In addition, YT guy got the sequence wrong about how the truth was hidden, lost and suppressed. It was the local Wuhan authorities that started to suppress info from their own national government. Only after that did the national government add its own suppression as they predictably covered up and deflected. Then Chairman Trump did the same thing.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on May 30, 2021, 11:02:38 AM
People who distrust on principle the Chinese government yet trust on principle the Chinese scientists are hopelessly naive. What they forget --- if they ever knew it, that is --- is that the Chinese scientists work in a heavily politicized environment, where the smallest step outside the party line might prove at best detrimental to their career and at worst life-threatening. Moreover, both heads of labs / departments and spokepersons are always selected among those professing (or feigning) the utmost loyalty to the party.

Taking the Wuhan lab scientists on their word that there was no leak is exactly like taking Stark & Lennard on their word that Einstein was wrong --- and actually, the comparison is wrong, as Stark & Lennard spoke with the full credit and prestige of Nobel Prize winners...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 30, 2021, 11:58:56 AM
Quote from: Florestan on May 30, 2021, 11:02:38 AM
People who distrust on principle the Chinese government yet trust on principle the Chinese scientists are hopelessly naive. What they forget --- if they ever knew it, that is --- is that the Chinese scientists work in a heavily politicized environment, where the smallest step outside the party line might prove at best detrimental to their career and at worst life-threatening. Moreover, both heads of labs / departments and spokepersons are always selected among those professing (or feigning) the utmost loyalty to the party.

Taking the Wuhan lab scientists on their word that there was no leak is exactly like taking Stark & Lennard on their word that Einstein was wrong --- and actually, the comparison is wrong, as Stark & Lennard spoke with the full credit and prestige of Nobel Prize winners...


     It has nothing to do with taking people at their word. Science doesn't work like that, not for Einstein or anyone else. It is not theology.

     The argument now is the same as it was a year ago, not over whose word to accept, but what the evidence shows.

     A case can be made that some observers, even among scientists, were influenced by Trumpist well poisoning to quickly dismiss a plausible theory that the lab in Wuhan may have been involved. This could have happened if lab workers became infected outside the lab, or if the lab had actually obtained the virus and the first transmission to humans originated there. But in no case are serious minded people accepting the word of scientists because they are scientists, or because they are anti-Trumpists, or Chicoms.

     Perhaps it's naive of me to wonder how it came to be, if it did, that the Wuhan lab was studying this particular virus if it hadn't infected humans. How did a previously unknown virus come to their attention?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on May 30, 2021, 12:14:43 PM
Quote from: drogulus on May 30, 2021, 11:58:56 AM
     It has nothing to do with taking people at their word.

Really?

If I quoted you along exactly this line, namely that Chinese scientists should always be taken on their word because they have nothing to hide and they always tell the truth, because, you know, they are scientists --- would you plead guilty of hopeless naivete?

Of course you wouldn't, because you can't even remember there was a time when you claimed that Chinese scientists should always be taken on their word because they have nothing to hide and they always tell the truth, because, you know, they are scientists.


Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 30, 2021, 12:25:09 PM
Quote from: greg on May 29, 2021, 03:17:10 PM
A complete failure on the part of the MSM when one guy can get to the party a year earlier than everyone else.

A complete failure of your critical faculties.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 30, 2021, 12:31:09 PM
Quote from: Florestan on May 30, 2021, 12:14:43 PM
Really?

If I quoted you along exactly this line, namely that Chinese scientists should always be taken on their word because they have nothing to hide and they always tell the truth, because, you know, they are scientists --- would you plead guilty of hopeless naivete?

Of course you wouldn't, because you can't even remember there was a time when you claimed that Chinese scientists should always be taken on their word because they have nothing to hide and they always tell the truth, because, you know, they are scientists.




     Scientists should not "always be taken at their word" no matter where they are located. There is no scientific infallibility principle, no one whose word must be taken.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on May 30, 2021, 12:32:35 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 30, 2021, 12:25:09 PM
A complete failure of your critical faculties.

|I was born and raised in a Communist dictatorship, so I'd rather err on the side of disbelieving / doubting each and every sentence uttered by a Communist government (such as China), be it weather forecast...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denial_of_the_Holodomor#Cover-up_of_the_famine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denial_of_the_Holodomor#Cover-up_of_the_famine)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on May 30, 2021, 12:34:38 PM
Quote from: drogulus on May 30, 2021, 12:31:09 PM
     Scientists should not "always be taken at their word" no matter where they are located. There is no scientific infallibility principle, no one whose word must be taken.

That's not what you believed / posted a year ago.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on May 30, 2021, 12:44:32 PM
Quote from: milk on May 29, 2021, 04:13:51 AM
JAMES LINDSAY:

Critical Race Theory...
believes racism is present in every aspect of life, every relationship, and every interaction and therefore has its advocates look for it everywhere
relies upon "interest convergence" (white people only give black people opportunities and freedoms when it is also in their own interests) and therefore doesn't trust any attempt to make racism better
is against free societies and wants to dismantle them and replace them with something its advocates control
only treats race issues as "socially constructed groups," so there are no individuals in Critical Race Theory
believes science, reason, and evidence are a "white" way of knowing and that storytelling and lived experience are a "black" alternative, which hurts everyone, especially black people
rejects all potential alternatives, like colorblindness, as forms of racism, making itself the only allowable game in town (which is totalitarian)
acts like anyone who disagrees with it must do so for racist and white supremacist reasons, even if those people are black (which is also totalitarian)
cannot be satisfied, so it becomes a kind of activist black hole that threatens to destroy everything it is introduced into

https://newdiscourses.com/2020/06/reasons-critical-race-theory-terrible-dealing-racism/ (https://newdiscourses.com/2020/06/reasons-critical-race-theory-terrible-dealing-racism/)

John McWhorter

THE ELECT: THE THREAT TO A PROGRESSIVE AMERICA FROM ANTI-BLACK ANTIRACISTS
My main aims will be:
1. to argue that this new ideology is actually a religion in all but name;
2. to argue that to understand it as a religion is to see coherence in what may seem like a welter of "crazy" or overblown behaviors;
3. to explore why this religion is so attractive to so many people;
4. to show that this religion is actively harmful to black people despite being intended as unprecedentedly "antiracist";
5. to show that a pragmatic, effective, liberal and even Democratic-friendly agenda for rescuing black America need not be founded on the tenets of this new religion;
6. to suggest ways to lessen the grip of this new religion on our public culture.


https://johnmcwhorter.substack.com/p/the-elect-neoracists-posing-as-antiracists

Thank you very much for that!

May God have mercy on them, traitors to their race as they are!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 30, 2021, 12:57:18 PM
     
Quote from: Florestan on May 30, 2021, 12:32:35 PM
|I was born and raised in a Communist dictatorship, so I'd rather err on the side of disbelieving / doubting each and every sentence uttered by a Communist government (such as China), be it weather forecast...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denial_of_the_Holodomor#Cover-up_of_the_famine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denial_of_the_Holodomor#Cover-up_of_the_famine)

     That's my position for any attempt to interfere with empirical processes on behalf of absolutist priors. I grew up in various parts of America, the land of the Free and the Monkey Trial.

Quote from: Florestan on May 30, 2021, 12:34:38 PM
That's not what you believed / posted a year ago.

     I extend more trust to scientists than to wizards, but that's conditional. I don't always accept a scientific consensus because the history of models is that they tend to last well past the point when they should be challenged. The Big Bang is one such model. I try to be careful not to stray out of my philosophical lane, but it really is the shit.

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 30, 2021, 02:05:34 PM
Quote from: Florestan on May 30, 2021, 12:32:35 PM
|I was born and raised in a Communist dictatorship, so I'd rather err on the side of disbelieving / doubting each and every sentence uttered by a Communist government (such as China), be it weather forecast...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denial_of_the_Holodomor#Cover-up_of_the_famine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denial_of_the_Holodomor#Cover-up_of_the_famine)

I don't see that as gainsaying my point.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 30, 2021, 02:06:32 PM
Quote from: Florestan on May 30, 2021, 12:34:38 PM
That's not what you believed / posted a year ago.

So far as I know, Ernie has always believed so.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 30, 2021, 03:58:12 PM
Don't read it, greg, it's MSM:

"A new surge of interest has revived the lab-leak theory. Well over a year since a novel coronavirus began to spread in Wuhan, the idea that the deadly outbreak could be linked to a virus research center in the Chinese city has lingered, unproven but not eliminated.

"Although the resurgent chatter may suggest new clues or proof, the inverse is in fact true. It is the persistent absence of any convincing evidence either for or against the theory that has prompted calls for more investigation.

President Biden said Wednesday that the U.S. intelligence community does "not believe there is sufficient information" to fully understand the likelihood of different scenarios for explaining the origin of the virus that causes covid-19.

"At least publicly, the evidence in favor of a link between the outbreak and the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) has not changed significantly in months, and many virologists still have persistent doubts that such a link exists.

"What has clearly changed, however, is the political debate. Most obviously, a new U.S. administration that is not so openly anti-China has led some former skeptics to reconsider the existing evidence. And public health experts — most of whom never ruled out the lab theory outright — have expressed disappointment with a World Health Organization-backed investigation that dismissed a link between WIV and the outbreak.

"The annual World Health Assembly this week brought new calls to significantly expand upon the WHO-backed investigation, which concluded in March. Biden on Wednesday announced that he was asking the U.S. intelligence community to "redouble its efforts" to collect information about the coronavirus's origin.

The United States would continue to partner with "like-minded partners around the world to press China to participate in a full, transparent, evidence-based international investigation," Biden said.

"So far, though, there is certainly no smoking gun. Here's where things stand:

"The public evidence for or against the lab leak is nowhere near decisive.

The lab-leak theory emerged in January 2020, when the virus was still mostly confined to China and had killed hundreds, rather than millions.

Links between WIV and the virus were floated in right-wing news organizations like the Washington Times, while former White House strategist Stephen K. Bannon questioned whether there was a link between the virus and "bioweapons research" in China.

"Experts quickly dismissed the idea that the coronavirus was intentionally developed as a bioweapon, but vaguer questions about the link between WIV and the virus, including those asked by Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) in February 2020, were harder to answer.

In April 2020, journalists including The Washington Post's David Ignatius and Josh Rogin suggested that a bat virus being studied in potentially risky experiments could have escaped the lab.

"For example, "gain-of-function" experiments examining how viruses found in animals can infect humans are noble in aim and designed to prevent future pandemics. But Rogin reported that U.S. officials had raised concerns about safety at WIV in 2018. "Whether the staff are interacting with bats in the wild or in the lab, they are routinely putting themselves at risk of infection," one unnamed U.S. scientist told a team of Post reporters for an April 30 report.

Most pandemics, however, have emerged via a simpler route: passing from an animal to a human through "zoonotic" infection. Plenty of virologists still argue that this was the most likely path of the novel coronavirus.

"But there is still a dearth of evidence about this coronavirus's origins. Without full cooperation from Chinese authorities, clues have primarily come out in dribs and drabs from intelligence leaks or complicated analyses of genetic code.

"Some analysts have complained about the unproved provenance of leaked intelligence, including the detail in a recent Wall Street Journal report that WIV staff may have fallen ill in 2019 with covid-like symptoms.

"The WHO-led investigation into the virus's origins only spurred interest in the lab-leak theory.

"Prominent virologists, many of whom had been hesitant to speak out publicly before, are now openly calling for a broader investigation.

Eighteen prominent scientists on May 14 published a letter in the journal Science arguing that "theories of accidental release" remained "viable." Among them was Ralph Baric, a virologist who worked with Shi Zhengli, a renowned expert on bat coronaviruses based in Wuhan, who is central to many lab-leak hypotheses.

"Their timing was motivated by this week's World Health Assembly and a desire to point out the perceived weaknesses of the WHO-backed investigation.

"That probe saw a team of 17 international experts fly to Wuhan to visit WIV themselves. It found that a "very likely" scenario involved an unknown animal passing the virus to humans.

The WHO team dismissed the lab-leak idea as "extremely unlikely." Indeed, its report spends considerably more time discussing a theory that the virus was imported on frozen food, an idea pushed by Beijing that has little international support.

Even to the leak theory's skeptics, that was a stretch.

"The dismissive attitude to the lab-leak theory furthered criticisms that the WHO team was too close to Chinese experts: Peter Daszak, head of the nonprofit EcoHealth Alliance, had been a colleague of Shi, the Wuhan coronavirus expert, for 15 years. The team only got three hours to visit the lab.

"At the end of the day, they show us what they show," Hung Nguyen-Viet, a Vietnamese expert on livestock and human health who joined the trip, told The Post.

"Speaking at a news conference in March, WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said that the lab-leak theory "requires further investigation" and that he was ready to deploy specialists on additional missions.

"It is still not clear what the endgame is.

"Biden's announcement on Wednesday lent credence to the lab-leak theory: Some Democrats are now backing calls for a congressional inquiry. The president set a 90-day deadline for the intelligence community to come "closer to a definitive conclusion" and pushed for more international pressure on China.

Yet Biden also admitted that the intelligence community so far only had "low or moderate confidence" in its assessments. Without Chinese cooperation, it is unclear how these bodies would be able to reach new conclusions within a three-month period.

"Broader international pressure could well stumble against China, which wields veto power not only at the World Health Assembly, but also at the U.N. Security Council. Plus, it isn't clear what standard of evidence would satisfy partisans on either side of the divide on the lab-leak theory, if any.

"We may never know exactly how the coronavirus that causes covid-19 spread to humans. Scientists still haven't pinpointed the origin of the influenza strain that killed millions in 1918. Although civet cats were speculated within months to be the intermediate host in a 2003 SARS outbreak, it took years to confirm it.

It wasn't until 2017 that that virus was finally traced back to bats. The lab that solved the mystery? The Wuhan Institute of Virology."

— Adam Taylor, reporter at The Washington Post.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 30, 2021, 06:54:35 PM
     People are going back to some version of the lab theory because natural transmission hasn't lead to a confirmed pathway. Many early cases had no connection to the wet market. So, if you want a definite answer the lab gives you a specific target, which may never be the case with natural transmission. Therefore, why not look for the lost wallet right by this lamppost, instead of out there in the dark?

     As Thomas Cromwell might have said, or at least a really good version of him, the Chicoms are certainly guilty, though not necessarily as charged.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on May 31, 2021, 01:22:13 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 30, 2021, 02:05:34 PM
I don't see that as gainsaying my point.

It doesn't. I don't even remember why I posted it as a reply to you.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on May 31, 2021, 01:44:59 AM
Most of DK in embarassement and anger about the breaking news, that sections in our intelligence services helped the US/NSA with spying on Danish neighbours and allies (Sweden, Germany, The Netherlands, Norway). And possibly on local Danish politicians too ...

The US might very well be conducting this policy in a real lot of nations: help us, and we'll of course exclude you from the tapping ...

The level of decision-making is unclear, but the leading Danish officers were after all transferred or sacked, when a report to politicians told about it. But real punishment (some would call this being close to high treason) is probably going to be diffuse and mild, unfortunately.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on May 31, 2021, 01:54:56 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on May 31, 2021, 01:44:59 AM
Most of DK in embarassement and anger about the breaking news, that sections in our intelligence services helped the US/NSA with spying on Danish neighbours and allies (Sweden, Germany, The Netherlands, Norway). And possibly on local Danish politicians too ...

The US might very well be conducting this policy in a real lot of nations: help us, and we'll of course exclude you from the tapping ...

The level of decision-making is unclear, but the leading Danish officers were after all transferred or sacked, when a report to politicians told about it. But real punishment (some would call this being close to high treason) is probably going to be diffuse and mild, unfortunately.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Swedes, Germans, Dutch and Norwegians in the intelligence services in their turn helped US with spying on Denmark, or on each other. Heck, it's in their job description.  :laugh:
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on May 31, 2021, 04:39:28 AM
Quote from: Florestan on May 30, 2021, 12:44:32 PM
Thank you very much for that!

May God have mercy on them, traitors to their race as they are!
I shouldn't laugh; that's what they (McWhorter, Glenn Loury, Erec Smith, Coleman Hughes, et al.) are called.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 31, 2021, 10:12:24 AM
Quote from: Florestan on May 31, 2021, 01:22:13 AM
It doesn't. I don't even remember why I posted it as a reply to you.

No worries.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on May 31, 2021, 10:41:34 AM
     How to Navigate the 'Great Reset' (https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:WeteACBj7t8J:https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-05-31/how-to-navigate-the-great-reset+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-b-1-d)

Pandemic lockdowns are coming to an end in the U.S., and with them, a massive economic recovery has begun. The closest parallel is the post-World War II era. That period created a massive societal "reset" in terms of employment, housing, infrastructure, wages and financial markets -- just like now.

Consider the circumstances of both periods. The nation is forced into difficult circumstances by a frightening enemy. Shortages are commonplace. The government and private sector focus on obtaining sufficient ammunition to vanquish this foe. Workers are furloughed, people are fearful even as the economy starts to recover. It takes time, but soon victory is at hand. The reopening begins with surging inflation, spot shortages of commodities, a dearth of housing, difficulty finding workers, and a very challenging transition as factories and offices struggle to restart and return to a more normal setting.


     Ah-yup....

Inflation: With the post-war period as a guide, we should expect commodity shortages, challenges in hiring, rising wages and a spike in inflation. But we should also expect this to be temporary, as more production comes online and the marketplace pivots to satisfy increased demand. Rather than persistent inflation, this might be a short, sharp reset upwards.

It is worth noting that the inflation cranks have been fighting the 1970s stagflation for decades. I question their motives, and marvel at how wrong they have been about inflation in both directions. I see no reason to suspect their approach has changed for the better this time, either.


     The day may finally come when "Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon" goes the way of the Big Bang. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/smiley.gif)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on May 31, 2021, 06:14:32 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on May 29, 2021, 04:49:38 PM
Speaking both English and Mandarin isn't the rarity you seem to think it is.

Quote from: SimonNZ on May 29, 2021, 04:49:38 PM
And this is to say nothing of the number of Chinese professionals who have learned English as a matter of course. All of which means no one needs some random Youtuber to be "the bridge".
Many of which who might be afraid to tell the truth, even abroad, because they might have family back home in China or want to return someday and still may suffer the consequences of telling the truth.

He has a large audience of listeners and doesn't plan to return to China, yet has spent many years building connections and learning many things about it, the language, culture, the Chinese internet, etc.

He doesn't have to go through anyone stifling his speech at all. So he was in a unique position to share the information. Sure, there could have been other people doing the same, but they either didn't or weren't able to get the information out so early to the English-speaking world.


Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 30, 2021, 12:25:09 PM
A complete failure of your critical faculties.
Lol what, that doesn't even make sense as a response.
You're the one who dismissed it as "conspiracy-like" rather than critically thinking about how it stacked up vs. the mainstream "wet market" narrative. Not me lol.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on June 01, 2021, 01:44:41 PM
https://www.isidewith.com/profile/4658280864/parties (https://www.isidewith.com/profile/4658280864/parties)

My result: 78% Republican, 31% Democratic





Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on June 01, 2021, 05:00:15 PM
93 Green
92 Socialist
91 Democratic
89 Women's equality
88 Peace and freedom....

That was far more interesting than most online quizzes I see offered.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on June 01, 2021, 06:49:35 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on June 01, 2021, 05:00:15 PM
93 Green
92 Socialist
91 Democratic
89 Women's equality
88 Peace and freedom....

That was far more interesting than most online quizzes I see offered.

My results were not out of line except for one thing: it decided I was an isolationist based solely on my dislike of drone assassinations. (I don't remember any other questions on foreign affairs.)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on June 01, 2021, 07:23:08 PM
Quote from: JBS on June 01, 2021, 06:49:35 PM
My results were not out of line except for one thing: it decided I was an isolationist based solely on my dislike of drone assassinations. (I don't remember any other questions on foreign affairs.)

I got a question about assassinating foreign suspects but not one about drones.

I assume there must be a larger pool of questions than those that come up in any one test.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on June 02, 2021, 01:58:21 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on June 01, 2021, 05:00:15 PM
That was far more interesting than most online quizzes I see offered.

I found it accidentally.  :D

Took it again with all the questions.

78 Republican
75 Constitution
53 American Solidarity
50 Libertarian
38 Transhumanist
31 Democratic
25 Women's Equality
17 Green
17 Socialist
15 Peace and Freedom.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on June 02, 2021, 05:52:44 AM
Quote from: Florestan on June 01, 2021, 01:44:41 PM
https://www.isidewith.com/profile/4658280864/parties (https://www.isidewith.com/profile/4658280864/parties)

My result: 78% Republican, 31% Democratic

Well that was fun.  Of course I don't get to vote in American elections, (more's the pity).

As between the only two relevant US parties, my result is Democrat 85%, Republican 25%.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on June 02, 2021, 08:28:20 AM

     The Covid Trauma Has Changed Economics—Maybe Forever (https://www.advisorperspectives.com/articles/2021/06/02/the-covid-trauma-has-changed-economics-maybe-forever?utm_source=articles_feed&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=item_link)

     This is good, real good.

FOR CENTURIES, theorists have pondered the recurring and inevitable swings that make up the business cycle. They've looked for causes in mass psychology, institutional complexity, and even weather patterns. According to the traditional laws of the cycle, it should've taken years for households to claw their way back from 2020's sudden collapse in economic activity.

     Note that shrinkster dogma said this couldn't happen. Government dollars can't expand the economy because people think taxes will go up. What if they do think that? I think that, and I still want more income and I still spend more when my income goes up, or at least feel free to do so. Paying more tax on more income doesn't bother me as much as paying less tax on less income. More is better than less. As for tax rates, they can go all over the place on the whims of policy makers based on no consistent theory on the effects on economic growth.

The new pandemic economics also shielded the financial system, but from the bottom up instead of the top down—a point repeatedly made by Neel Kashkari, who helped lead the rescue as a U.S. Department of the Treasury official in 2008 and who's now head of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis. As their jobs vanished in the spring of 2020, Americans struggled to make rent, pay mortgages, and cover car payments. Without the government's efforts to replace lost income, the health crisis that had already triggered a jobs crisis would have morphed into a financial crisis.

     This time shrinksters were ignored and the government spent into the hands of bank customers and didn't need to fix the banks in a way that helped no one else. Let's see how long it takes to unlearn this lesson (watches clock).

After an initial burst of spending, many countries quickly pivoted to reining in their budgets in the years after 2008, driven by concerns about rising public debt—a trend that was most pronounced in Europe. In the U.S., state and local government cutbacks resulted in mass job losses. In both cases, relatively high unemployment and low growth rates persisted for much of the decade.

     I don't understand how a bigger number we'll never pay is more threatening than a smaller number we'll never pay.

     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on June 02, 2021, 11:23:16 AM
Quote from: Florestan on June 01, 2021, 01:44:41 PM
https://www.isidewith.com/profile/4658280864/parties (https://www.isidewith.com/profile/4658280864/parties)

My result: 78% Republican, 31% Democratic

74% American Solidarity
62% Peace and Freedom
56% Socialist
55% Transhumanist
54% Democratic
53% Green
50% Constitution
48% Republican
38% Libertarian


Many issues I'm undecided on so it may have skewed the results.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on June 02, 2021, 12:22:16 PM
Which were the "transhumanist" questions?

I don't think I got any of those.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on June 02, 2021, 02:26:19 PM
The Pod Save America guys were reminiscing about some of the ridiculous "scandals" of the Obama era when they all were working in the White House, and one mentioned "Jacketgate", which I hadn't heard of before.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVsUa-lQ2WY

^ that Daily Show recap of Jacketgate proves once again that there's an old long-forgotten hypocritical pre-president Trump quote for everything
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 02, 2021, 03:33:50 PM
Trump was always an arse-wipe. There are even people who have since migrated to the MAGA-verse who knew that.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 02, 2021, 03:34:37 PM
Legislative bills take aim at school segregation in Mass. (https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/06/02/metro/legislative-bills-take-aim-school-segregation-mass/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on June 02, 2021, 03:51:19 PM
Quote from: drogulus on June 02, 2021, 08:28:20 AM
     Note that shrinkster dogma said this couldn't happen. Government dollars can't expand the economy because people think taxes will go up. What if they do think that? I think that, and I still want more income and I still spend more when my income goes up, or at least feel free to do so. Paying more tax on more income doesn't bother me as much as paying less tax on less income. More is better than less. As for tax rates, they can go all over the place on the whims of policy makers based on no consistent theory on the effects on economic growth.

Agree.  I'll be upset earning more when the marginal rate exceeds 100%

Quote from: drogulus on June 02, 2021, 08:28:20 AM
The new pandemic economics also shielded the financial system, but from the bottom up instead of the top down—a point repeatedly made by Neel Kashkari, who helped lead the rescue as a U.S. Department of the Treasury official in 2008 and who's now head of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis. As their jobs vanished in the spring of 2020, Americans struggled to make rent, pay mortgages, and cover car payments. Without the government's efforts to replace lost income, the health crisis that had already triggered a jobs crisis would have morphed into a financial crisis.

     This time shrinksters were ignored and the government spent into the hands of bank customers and didn't need to fix the banks in a way that helped no one else. Let's see how long it takes to unlearn this lesson (watches clock).
...
     I don't understand how a bigger number we'll never pay is more threatening than a smaller number we'll never pay.

Well there is, I guess, a point where servicing a huge debt becomes a problem.

But at least for the USA the solution is to Tax the Rich.  Too much as gone to the Rich for too long without much improvement for typical Americans.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on June 02, 2021, 07:10:47 PM
Quote from: Fëanor on June 02, 2021, 03:51:19 PM


Well there is, I guess, a point where servicing a huge debt becomes a problem.



     Why guess? If it was real nobody would have to guess. It's what I call the nominal argument. There's an amount of money that can't exist because dollars can no longer be produced to pay for things. It's always "some day" the Big Number arrives, but not a particular day or particular number. The goalposts are always moved to an unspecified point in the future.

     It's totally bogus. As the real economy grows more dollars can be created to run it (and must be created) and there's no nominal limit. The money system can never run out of itself. The limits are the ability of the real economy to produce what can be bought and sold, not some dollar amount.

     As it happens huge public debt bulges tend to coexist with very low interest rates, not because a high interest bill can't be paid but because GDP relative to debt is low. The irony is that if you wanted the government to pay more interest the best way would be to run the economy hot. I think there are better reasons to run the economy hot than to pay more interest to pension funds, but really I don't think what the government pays matters as a burden. That's not a factor at all.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on June 03, 2021, 01:32:15 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on June 02, 2021, 12:22:16 PM
Which were the "transhumanist" questions?

I don't think I got any of those.

I believe there are no party-specific questions. You answer the questions as they come and in the end they calculate your results. Still, you can see the answers of any given party if you click on their name in the result page.

I wasn't even aware of this party. What a bizarre name...  :D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on June 03, 2021, 04:49:31 AM
Now, this is fun!  :D

https://arzamas.academy/materials/1269 (https://arzamas.academy/materials/1269)

My result: Cadet.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on June 03, 2021, 10:51:04 AM
Were you imagining yourself a Russian laborer from the Tsarist era when you answered those questions or did you answer as yourself in 2021?

I'd be a Menshevik. But I already knew that.

edit: I just noticed autocorrect changed "Tsarist" to "statist". How curious.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 03, 2021, 12:44:32 PM
Investigating yet another Trump stooge.
FBI investigating Postmaster General Louis DeJoy in connection with past political fundraising (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/louis-dejoy-fbi-investigation/2021/06/03/4e24e122-c3d3-11eb-93f5-ee9558eecf4b_story.html)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on June 03, 2021, 05:53:14 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on June 02, 2021, 12:22:16 PM
Which were the "transhumanist" questions?

I don't think I got any of those.
I'm not sure, I didn't get that as a category, never clicked "show more of x questions," and don't recall any questions on that topic.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 03, 2021, 06:12:18 PM
It's still a great distance from repudiating The Yuge Lie.

Pence: Trump and I likely won't see 'eye to eye' on Jan. 6 (https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/06/03/nation/pence-returns-another-key-early-presidential-voting-state/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on June 03, 2021, 09:31:06 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on June 03, 2021, 10:51:04 AM
Were you imagining yourself a Russian laborer from the Tsarist era when you answered those questions or did you answer as yourself in 2021?

I imagined myself in Tsarist Russia exactly what am I in real life: an educated "bourgeois" or if you prefer, a member of the intellectual middle class. What I support now I would have supported back then too: rule of law (preferably in a constitutional monarchy) and free market (with some restrictions). As a Christian I'd have rejected militant and aggressive atheism, as a Liberal (in the European sense of the word) I'd have rejected statism and collectivism and as a cultural traditionalist I'd have rejected the proletarianization of the society. Ergo, there would have been no way I'd have supported any party of the Left.

Just like you, I already knew what I'd be. I've always wondered what I would have been back then and there --- and always answered Cadet because really there was no alternative, being the KDP the only non-Socialist party in 1917 Russia.

That being said, I cannot exclude a priori the idea that I might have succumbed to the syren song of Socialism / Communism, especially if I had been a peasant or worker (though not all of them were Bolshevik / Menshevik / SR and conversely there were many well-to-do intellectuals who were). But I'd have probably ended up in bitter disillusionment. Be it as it might, either Cadet or B / M / SR, I'd have probably ended up in emmigration or in Gulag, in case I wouldn't have been killed in the Civil War.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on June 06, 2021, 08:57:16 AM

     Why I Can't Stand Rich People With Liberal Lawn Signs (https://www.thedailybeast.com/why-i-cant-stand-rich-people-with-liberal-lawn-signs?ref=home)

     (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/smiley.gif)

     It's the misplaced priorities I can't stand. If you improve peoples lives substantively they might stop hating you long enough to listen to what you say. Trumpists know no one on either side has run to their rescue. Biden may be able to change that and there are encouraging signs that he will tilt the balance in favor of bottom up growth even though further expansion efforts will be smaller than he wants.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on June 06, 2021, 09:58:49 AM
Quote from: drogulus on June 06, 2021, 08:57:16 AM
     Why I Can't Stand Rich People With Liberal Lawn Signs (https://www.thedailybeast.com/why-i-cant-stand-rich-people-with-liberal-lawn-signs?ref=home)

     (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/smiley.gif)

     It's the misplaced priorities I can't stand. If you improve peoples lives substantively they might stop hating you long enough to listen to what you say. Trumpists know no one on either side has run to their rescue. Biden may be able to change that and there are encouraging signs that he will tilt the balance in favor of bottom up growth even though further expansion efforts will be smaller than he wants.

Yeah, the only Rich man's lawn sign I want to see says, "TAX the RICH !!".
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 07, 2021, 06:09:47 AM
Trump's White House Lawyer Don McGahn Finally Talks to Congress
He long flouted a congressional subpoena, but will at last testify about Trump's obstruction of justice as outlined in the Mueller report. (https://thebulwark.com/trumps-white-house-lawyer-don-mcgahn-finally-talks-to-congress/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on June 07, 2021, 07:18:00 AM
     There's a Bipartisan Way to Save $1 Trillion: Cut Benefits for the Rich (https://www.thedailybeast.com/theres-a-bipartisan-way-to-save-dollar1-trillion-and-its-to-cut-benefits-for-the-rich?ref=scroll)

While economists debate the magnitude, there is a broad consensus that steep tax rate increases reduce incentives to work, save, invest, and be productive.


     The rich don't work, save, invest and produce enough to make a difference in the total productivity of the economy. They own real and financial assets. Taxing these helps keep taxes on productive people low. That's something, though the big action is on the spend side, not the tax side. I maintain that spending increases are a better targeting tool than tax cuts for the same purposes. The same net spending differential gets you more of what you want.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on June 08, 2021, 09:12:10 AM
Can't remember if we already went through the Six Moral Foundations.
Retook it just now...

https://www.idrlabs.com/morality/6/test.php

QuoteYour scores:
Care 86%
Loyalty 47%
Fairness 75%
Authority 53%
Purity 67%
Liberty 89%
Your strongest moral foundation is Liberty.

Your morality is closest to that of a Left-Liberal.



No surprise to score highest on this:
QuoteLiberty: This foundation is related to the individual's need to be his own master and to avoid the dominant social mores imposed by the group. It underlies the virtues of independence and autonomy. It is tied to emotions such as self-sufficiency and defiance. Libertarians typically score the highest on this dimension, conservatives the second-highest, and left-liberals the lowest.

So basically I have left-liberal values for the other ones, but have this one in particular that is highly non-associated with left-liberal. That's kinda interesting...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on June 08, 2021, 09:30:18 AM
Quote from: greg on June 08, 2021, 09:12:10 AM
https://www.idrlabs.com/morality/6/test.php

(https://charts.idrlabs.com/graphic/morality-6-bar?p=100,100,50,67,100,100&l=EN)

Your scores:

Care 100%
Loyalty 50%
Fairness 100%
Authority 67%
Purity 100%   
Liberty 100%

You have no one strongest moral foundation.

Your morality is closest to that of a Conservative.


I knew it already.  :D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on June 08, 2021, 09:48:59 AM
How in the blazing tarnations did you score 100% on 4 of the 6?  ???
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on June 08, 2021, 09:56:32 AM
Quote from: greg on June 08, 2021, 09:48:59 AM
How in the blazing tarnations did you score 100% on 4 of the 6?  ???

I don't know, I just answered the questions.  :)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on June 08, 2021, 04:09:19 PM
Quote from: Florestan on June 08, 2021, 09:30:18 AM

Fairness 100%


SJW. Next you'll be quoting the sermon on the mount by that other SJW.

Does "100% Liberty" mean you're now for a woman's right to choose to have an abortion and for gay people to marry and adopt? Or is that "100% my liberty to be against the liberty of others"?


edit: just took the half the test and those are some ridiculous finger-on-the-scales questions, so gave up
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 08, 2021, 05:17:10 PM
 Sabrina Shankman:

In Boston, there are now twice as many nights when temperatures don't drop below 70 degrees.

In Milton, the earliest 90-degree day now falls two weeks earlier than the historical average.

And in both places, the number of 90-degree days has steadily climbed — fully doubling in Milton, at the Blue Hill Observatory and Science Center — over the course of this decade, compared with historical averages.

Experts have long said that climate change will bring more extreme heat and accompanying health threats. As residents of Boston sweat out these early June days in cooling centers and air conditioners work overtime, that trend appears to be bearing out. Emergency calls for medical help jumped by a third over the weekend.

"It has been getting consistently warmer, and invariably that means what was a warm day 20 years ago is going to be a lot warmer today, simply because the background has shifted," said Raymond Bradley, a climatologist at the University of Massachusetts Amherst.

The extreme heat that has settled over the state in recent days falls in line with the trends that meteorologists have been tracking. "With climate change, it's not just about how hot it gets and how frequent — it's also about how cold it's not getting," said Andy Nash, the meteorologist-in-charge at the National Weather Service Forecast office in Norton.

On Sunday, the temperature never dropped below 70 degrees. On Monday, the low was 73. When temperatures stay that high, some scientists say, there's no chance for the body to cool down, heightening danger.

That means that with these extreme temperatures comes extreme risk.

"The evidence is clear that the first heat wave is the most deadly, and that seems to be particularly true in places like Boston where we're not really used to the heat," said Aaron Bernstein, interim director of The Center for Climate, Health, and the Global Environment at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.

When temperatures soar and stay there, emergency room doctors see a flood of patients with a host of health issues, including respiratory problems, seizures, heart attacks, strokes, and heat exhaustion, Bernstein said.

Boston Emergency Medical Services experienced a 31 percent increase in call volume on Saturday and Sunday compared to a typical day, according to the office of Acting Mayor Kim Janey.

While the effects of extreme heat are wide-ranging, they're felt more acutely in some populations than others.

"The folks who are most vulnerable to heat are often people breathing the most polluted air, who are often poorest. And in this country, particularly, Black Americans live in neighborhoods that are hotter than others because of redlining," said Bernstein. "You cannot disentangle heat risk from racial injustice."

Studies have shown that the deadliness of extreme heat will depend on how the world responds to the climate crisis. A 2020 study found that under a worst-case scenario of warming, Boston could see between 200 and 500 excess deaths from extreme heat in 2090. Another study found that by the 2080s, Boston would see a four-fold increase in extreme heat deaths under a moderate warming scenario, versus a seven-fold increase under a worst-case scenario.

The current heat wave comes at the same time that scientists have logged the highest-ever amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Experts from the Scripps Institute of Oceanography and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association announced on Monday that the May average for atmospheric carbon dioxide was 419 parts per million, and the highest level recorded since measurements began 63 years ago at the NOAA observatory in Mauna Loa, Hawaii.

"We are adding roughly 40 billion metric tons of CO2 pollution to the atmosphere per year," Pieter Tans, a senior scientist with NOAA's Global Monitoring Laboratory, said in a statement. "That is a mountain of carbon that we dig up out of the earth, burn, and release into the atmosphere as CO2 — year after year."

Massachusetts has warmed roughly 2 degrees Fahrenheit in the last century, and even under best-case scenarios for global warming, the temperature is expected to continue rising.

In the past, from 1971-2000, Massachusetts logged an average of four days above 90 degrees. But by the middle of the century, that number could be between 10 and 28 days. By the end of the century, experts say, that could be between 13 and 56 days.

The weather pattern that brought this week's heat to Massachusetts features high pressure off the country's southeast coast, which is pumping hot and humid air into the region, said Samantha Borisoff, a climatologist with the Northeast Regional Climate Center at Cornell University.

"In the case of the recent heat, you have a naturally occurring weather pattern that sets Massachusetts up for hot weather plus the background of a warming climate making it that much more likely for Massachusetts to experience these really hot days," she said.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on June 08, 2021, 05:36:18 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on June 08, 2021, 04:09:19 PM
Does "100% Liberty" mean you're now for a woman's right to choose to have an abortion and for gay people to marry and adopt?
The gay rights thing might exclusively be under freedom, but I think abortion is not as clear cut, because the unborn baby can't consent to its own life or death, so it's basically telling the woman that she can have liberty/freedom to choose while the baby can't. (not 100% against abortion, just a point worth mentioning)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on June 08, 2021, 11:38:01 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on June 08, 2021, 04:09:19 PM
SJW. Next you'll be quoting the sermon on the mount by that other SJW.

Does "100% Liberty" mean you're now for a woman's right to choose to have an abortion and for gay people to marry and adopt? Or is that "100% my liberty to be against the liberty of others"?


edit: just took the half the test and those are some ridiculous finger-on-the-scales questions, so gave up

As different from you, I attach no importance whatsoever to these tests and I don't take them seriously but for fun only. And fun I had when I saw all those 100%s, putting me more to the left than the left.  :laugh:

The conservative morality estimate, though, is 100% accurate (pun).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on June 09, 2021, 04:54:32 AM
Quote from: greg on June 08, 2021, 05:36:18 PM
The gay rights thing might exclusively be under freedom, but I think abortion is not as clear cut, because the unborn baby can't consent to its own life or death, so it's basically telling the woman that she can have liberty/freedom to choose while the baby can't. (not 100% against abortion, just a point worth mentioning)

An human embryo is human but not a human being.  At what point exactly does a human fetus become a human being with a full suite of human rights?  Indeed, is the new born, without conscious life experience and very limited perception of its environment, fully a human being?  Or are we just drawing the line at the point of birth?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on June 09, 2021, 06:50:16 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on June 09, 2021, 04:54:32 AM
At what point exactly does a human fetus become a human being with a full suite of human rights?
That's a line that is difficult to draw, why everyone is so mixed on the issue.



Quote from: Fëanor on June 09, 2021, 04:54:32 AM
Indeed, is the new born, without conscious life experience and very limited perception of its environment, fully a human being?
And if you push this reasoning far enough, yeah, you could probably even justify killing newborns. Or maybe even up to the age of four, since they are practically on autopilot until then. And if you took that one step further with the idea of someone that's not "fully human being" not being able to have the choice, then you could say that since the brain doesn't stop developing until the age of 25-ish, people aren't fully human beings, so their parents still have the right to kill them then.  :P

It's one of those things where it's difficult to match the logic with the morality, because your moral compass lets you know how bad something is in shades of a color. So I think most people's gut feeling is that aborting at 8 months would be dark, while aborting at 2 months would be much lighter. 5 months a medium tone. But this is not how the legal system works, it has to set a precise point when it is and isn't allowed, so it will never be able to capture the nuance of one's own moral compass. Which may lead people to intellectualize this away, ignoring their gut feeling and just referring to the legal system on how to feel.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on June 09, 2021, 08:05:48 AM
I took the political quiz that was posted a page or so back and here are my results:
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on June 09, 2021, 11:28:05 AM
Quote from: greg on June 09, 2021, 06:50:16 AM
That's a line that is difficult to draw, {when does a fetus become a human being?} why everyone is so mixed on the issue.


And if you push this reasoning far enough, yeah, you could probably even justify killing newborns. Or maybe even up to the age of four, since they are practically on autopilot until then. And if you took that one step further with the idea of someone that's not "fully human being" not being able to have the choice, then you could say that since the brain doesn't stop developing until the age of 25-ish, people aren't fully human beings, so their parents still have the right to kill them then.  :P

It's one of those things where it's difficult to match the logic with the morality, because your moral compass lets you know how bad something is in shades of a color. So I think most people's gut feeling is that aborting at 8 months would be dark, while aborting at 2 months would be much lighter. 5 months a medium tone. But this is not how the legal system works, it has to set a precise point when it is and isn't allowed, so it will never be able to capture the nuance of one's own moral compass. Which may lead people to intellectualize this away, ignoring their gut feeling and just referring to the legal system on how to feel.

For the record "3rd trimester" might be good time as a general rule.  However if severe mental or physical deformity is strongly suspected, then abortion at any point should be permitted, IMHO, and perhaps even infanticide at birth.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on June 09, 2021, 11:46:31 AM
"Moral Score"?  WTF?

Can't say I was impressed by the quiz but I have nothing to hide.  Yeah, I'm a "caring" guy  :D ...

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on June 09, 2021, 12:26:08 PM
"At what point exactly does a human fetus become a human being with a full suite of human rights?"

Quote from: greg on June 09, 2021, 06:50:16 AM
That's a line that is difficult to draw, why everyone is so mixed on the issue.

That's not why "everyone is mixed on the issue." Some wonder when a pregnant woman ceases to be a human being with a full suite of human rights, because that too is being decided.   
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on June 10, 2021, 03:20:38 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on June 09, 2021, 12:26:08 PM
"At what point exactly does a human fetus become a human being with a full suite of human rights?"

That's not why "everyone is mixed on the issue." Some wonder when a pregnant woman ceases to be a human being with a full suite of human rights, because that too is being decided.

So this tends to define it as a woman's rights versus a fetus' rights issue.  I was arguing that -- at least up to some point -- a fetus has no rights.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on June 10, 2021, 06:48:49 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on June 09, 2021, 11:28:05 AM
For the record "3rd trimester" might be good time as a general rule.  However if severe mental or physical deformity is strongly suspected, then abortion at any point should be permitted, IMHO, and perhaps even infanticide at birth.
I feel pretty similar to this.



Quote from: Fëanor on June 09, 2021, 11:46:31 AM
"Moral Score"?  WTF?

Can't say I was impressed by the quiz but I have nothing to hide.  Yeah, I'm a "caring" guy  :D ...
Would you say that very low Liberty score is accurate for you?
If it is, do you like doing what other people tell you to do, and being subordinate? Or would you describe it a different way?
(because not valuing liberty/autonomy is really alien to me, would like to understand)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 10, 2021, 09:27:18 AM
Trust in the U.S. president fell to historic lows in most countries surveyed during Donald Trump's presidency, according to Pew. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2021/06/10/pew-global-approval-biden-us/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F337591f%2F60c23a5c9d2fdae30277ef41%2F5972fde29bbc0f1cdcef9ee3%2F14%2F72%2F60c23a5c9d2fdae30277ef41)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 10, 2021, 09:28:46 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 10, 2021, 09:27:18 AM
Trust in the U.S. president fell to historic lows in most countries surveyed during Donald Trump's presidency, according to Pew. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2021/06/10/pew-global-approval-biden-us/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F337591f%2F60c23a5c9d2fdae30277ef41%2F5972fde29bbc0f1cdcef9ee3%2F14%2F72%2F60c23a5c9d2fdae30277ef41)

When the disgraced former president infested the White House, you could only trust him to be a self-absorbed ass-wipe
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on June 10, 2021, 11:04:05 AM
Quote from: greg on June 10, 2021, 06:48:49 AM
Would you say that very low Liberty score is accurate for you?
If it is, do you like doing what other people tell you to do, and being subordinate? Or would you describe it a different way?
(because not valuing liberty/autonomy is really alien to me, would like to understand)

Well gosh, let's remember this quiz has only 36 questions;  you'd really need a long questionnaire to get reliable results.

(https://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=30359.0;attach=74374;image)

Although my inclination is "Left-liberal" apparently, you'll notice I'm closest to Conservative in the 'Authority' and 'Purity' categories, (whatever purity precisely means).  Isn't authority somewhat the flip of liberty?  In any case I think various countries would be better off if citizens were more "socially compliant" even if the compliance demands so enforcement by Big Brother.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: LKB on June 10, 2021, 02:26:08 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 10, 2021, 09:28:46 AM
When the disgraced former president infested the White House, you could only trust him to be a self-absorbed ass-wipe

Karl, l suspect that with that post you may have offended ass-wipes of every... stripe.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on June 10, 2021, 03:06:36 PM
Quote from: Fëanor on June 10, 2021, 11:04:05 AM
Isn't authority somewhat the flip of liberty?
Yeah, I'd say so.



Quote from: Fëanor on June 10, 2021, 11:04:05 AM
In any case I think various countries would be better off if citizens were more "socially compliant" even if the compliance demands so enforcement by Big Brother.
Why? That same Big Brother could create hell on earth the second the leader (who may even be a good dude) dies and some asshole psychopath takes charge. Or the current dude who may have seemed good was bad all along. If you don't keep power in check, you will be doomed to live a meaningless life like a cow on a farm ready to be eaten by those in power. A promise of providing safety can be nothing but an excuse to control, manipulate and commit evil acts on large amounts of the population. You need a little of it to maximize freedom, but it should always be kept in mind that freedom is the end goal, not safety. Maslow hierarchy of needs- aim for the top, not the bottom.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on June 10, 2021, 03:14:21 PM
Quote from: Fëanor on June 10, 2021, 03:20:38 AM
So this tends to define it as a woman's rights versus a fetus' rights issue.  I was arguing that -- at least up to some point -- a fetus has no rights.

I agree. And yes. If the RCC had its way, it would be illegal to use Plan B contraception and a woman would lose personal autonomy even before pregnancy. Ev'ry sperm is sacred, ev'ry sperm is good! Most evangelicals believe fertilized eggs have immortal souls and so have full human rights before pregnancy.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on June 10, 2021, 04:09:12 PM
Quote from: greg on June 10, 2021, 03:06:36 PM
Quote from: Fëanor on June 10, 2021, 11:04:05 AM
...
Although my inclination is "Left-liberal" apparently, you'll notice I'm closest to Conservative in the 'Authority' and 'Purity' categories, (whatever purity precisely means).  Isn't authority somewhat the flip of liberty?  In any case I think various countries would be better off if citizens were more "socially compliant" even if the compliance demands so enforcement by Big Brother.

Why? That same Big Brother could create hell on earth the second the leader (who may even be a good dude) dies and some asshole psychopath takes charge. Or the current dude who may have seemed good was bad all along. If you don't keep power in check, you will be doomed to live a meaningless life like a cow on a farm ready to be eaten by those in power. A promise of providing safety can be nothing but an excuse to control, manipulate and commit evil acts on large amounts of the population. You need a little of it to maximize freedom, but it should always be kept in mind that freedom is the end goal, not safety. Maslow hierarchy of needs- aim for the top, not the bottom.

Well the USofA just had an asshole psychopath in charge for 4 years and survived it.  But then as they say, 'In a democracy people get the government they deserve'.

Everything in degree.  In any case I'm talking about a democracy, not a dictatorship.  So is it so bad if in a COVID-19 situation, say, people are fined for large indoor gatherings?  Or for not wearing a facemask in public places?  Or kids are not permitted to attend school without vaccination were it is available?  This the sort of Big Brotherly control I'm talking about.

A church here in Ontario was fined and eventually padlocked because the pastor and congregation would not obey the rule against large public gatherings:  was this a violation of religious freedom or "liberty" in general.

I don't think so.  In any case the "liberty" to do whatever the eff you want regardless of the rights and protection of others is invalid.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on June 10, 2021, 04:18:22 PM
Quote from: greg on June 10, 2021, 03:06:36 PM
but it should always be kept in mind that freedom is the end goal, not safety.

Bullshit. And if I challenge you to expand on this nonsense statement of absolute certainty you're going to say you're not really interested in politics, right?

And "Maslow hierarchy of needs"? Self-actualization =/= "freedom", and certainly not in the sense you're using the term. And its saying "safety"is one of the bedrock requirements for self-actualization, not something optional.

For the hundreth time: try putting down the amateur youtubers and pick up a thick academic book.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 10, 2021, 05:50:18 PM
Quote from: LKB on June 10, 2021, 02:26:08 PM
Karl, l suspect that with that post you may have offended ass-wipes of every... stripe.



Dadnabbit! I knew the risks!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on June 11, 2021, 10:14:15 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on June 10, 2021, 04:18:22 PM
Bullshit. And if I challenge you to expand on this nonsense statement of absolute certainty you're going to say you're not really interested in politics, right?
I'm not interested in most of the popular things related to politics that are most often discussed- health care, stupid gaffes, etc. not interested.

Just conceptual stuff is far more interesting.


Quote from: SimonNZ on June 10, 2021, 04:18:22 PM
And "Maslow hierarchy of needs"? Self-actualization =/= "freedom", and certainly not in the sense you're using the term. And its saying "safety"is one of the bedrock requirements for self-actualization, not something optional.
Freedom is an *absolute* requirement for self-actualization. Self-actualization is the ability to move forward to wherever the compass of your soul points you. In a totalitarian state, every direction will be blocked. Unless you are one of the rare people that find self-actualization in merely surviving, then yeah, *there's always exceptions to the rule, so it's not 100% absolute*.

And yeah, i think in my post i hinted at that, you use safety only as a stepping stone toward freedom, not the end goal. If people figured "oh, Earth is safer here so we'll never explore space, it's too dangerous and scary" then we'd never have gone to space.

Which is why, (maybe i already said this, too?) you need a police force (ironically) to maximize freedom, because you'll never have 100% freedom, but you need some protection from the random bad people out there who would just get away with killing everyone if they could if there were no enforcement. But too much police, and too many rules/laws, and you lose freedom.

Imagine if the US didn't have all of these petty crimes being enforced so strictly. Several of these BLM cases wouldn't even have happened. It also tends to affect minorities more. Remove the petty laws and there will be less police brutality against minorities, period, because there will be less law enforcement contact. One example from my own experience is a case from when I was in high school, a friend of a friend (who was black btw) was in a car with some weed and the police was about to pull him over, but he panicked and ran into a tree and died. If we didn't have these absolutely retarded drug laws, he'd still be alive today.

So in my view, libertarian ideology would probably be the most beneficial to preventing stuff like this. (Probably, idk for sure, since there could always be a variable I'm overlooking, but it'd be something that more people should look into)

Quote from: SimonNZ on June 10, 2021, 04:18:22 PM
For the hundreth time: try putting down the amateur youtubers and pick up a thick academic book.
I'm not getting those thoughts from youtubers. They are useful for providing information and perspectives, but not for forming my own perspective.





Quote from: Fëanor on June 10, 2021, 04:09:12 PM
Why? That same Big Brother could create hell on earth the second the leader (who may even be a good dude) dies and some asshole psychopath takes charge. Or the current dude who may have seemed good was bad all along. If you don't keep power in check, you will be doomed to live a meaningless life like a cow on a farm ready to be eaten by those in power. A promise of providing safety can be nothing but an excuse to control, manipulate and commit evil acts on large amounts of the population. You need a little of it to maximize freedom, but it should always be kept in mind that freedom is the end goal, not safety. Maslow hierarchy of needs- aim for the top, not the bottom.


Well the USofA just had an asshole psychopath in charge for 4 years and survived it.  But then as they say, 'In a democracy people get the government they deserve'.

Everything in degree.  In any case I'm talking about a democracy, not a dictatorship.  So is it so bad if in a COVID-19 situation, say, people are fined for large indoor gatherings?  Or for not wearing a facemask in public places?  Or kids are not permitted to attend school without vaccination were it is available?  This the sort of Big Brotherly control I'm talking about.

A church here in Ontario was fined and eventually padlocked because the pastor and congregation would not obey the rule against large public gatherings:  was this a violation of religious freedom or "liberty" in general.

I don't think so.  In any case the "liberty" to do whatever the eff you want regardless of the rights and protection of others is invalid.
Yeah, that's another case of "where do you draw the line?" Which is difficult to answer.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on June 11, 2021, 05:27:34 PM
new long article from Reuters on the ongoing death threats to elecrion officiald from Trumpists:

A REUTERS SPECIAL REPORT
Trump-inspired death threats are terrorizing election workers (https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-trump-georgia-threats/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 11, 2021, 06:19:16 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on June 11, 2021, 05:27:34 PM
new long article from Reuters on the ongoing death threats to elecrion officiald from Trumpists:

A REUTERS SPECIAL REPORT
Trump-inspired death threats are terrorizing election workers (https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-trump-georgia-threats/)

"Aw, c'mon! Both parties do this!"
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on June 11, 2021, 07:03:06 PM
I know you're joking, but doubtless there are some/many loons out there who actually believe that.

What to them are the "both sides" of a prolonged campaign of death threats to election officials condoned and encouraged by a sore loser who refuses to concede, partly for his hurt ego and partly because he needs the immunity from criminal prosecution that comes with the office?

...or is it just another iteration of "something, something, BLM!"  and "something, something, Antifa!"?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on June 12, 2021, 02:50:32 AM
And then there's the chance of living in a near-totalitarian state that uses 'Freedom' and 'self-actualisation' as its slogan to keep people in their fetters.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on June 12, 2021, 05:52:19 PM
Quote from: Herman on June 12, 2021, 02:50:32 AM
And then there's the chance of living in a near-totalitarian state that uses 'Freedom' and 'self-actualisation' as its slogan to keep people in their fetters.
It seems to me the right-wing libertarians will more often genuinely believe that, while the authoritarian right (more traditional) conservatives often can be dishonest like that. "Freedom for me, but not for you" type of mentality.
And if you are referring to the US as "near-totalitarian," then it seems like we should stop making unnecessary laws and legalize more stuff.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on June 13, 2021, 08:06:25 AM
Quote from: greg on June 12, 2021, 05:52:19 PM
It seems to me the right-wing libertarians will more often genuinely believe that, while the authoritarian right (more traditional) conservatives often can be dishonest like that. "Freedom for me, but not for you" type of mentality.
And if you are referring to the US as "near-totalitarian," then it seems like we should stop making unnecessary laws and legalize more stuff.

If Herman thinks the USA is "near-totalitarian", (and that's not what I construe), then I don't agree.

Historically and 'till the present the Americans have been obsessed with "liberty" and "rugged individualism" in the sense of I can do whatever I want with little regard for societal good ...

At least that's been the case up to 'till now.  History has shown that a substantial portion of the populace feels deep frustration, they are willing to abandon freedom and democracy for "order" and the promises of demagogues.  I happened in pre-War Germany, it almost happened in Washington on January 6th.  It is still happening in that Republic congress folk still overwhelming are supporting Trump and deny or ignore the 'Big Lie'.

More fundamentally, what is the cause of the frustration of so many Americans?  OK, they are mostly White, older, and small-town, but can they all be dismissed as just racists?  Or is there something also at work?  My hypothesis is that much of the frustration is based on the stagnation of incomes and the conviction their children will not better off than they have been.  (Not to say the racism is real enough.)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 13, 2021, 09:45:54 AM
Late on the night of April 24, the wife of Georgia's top election official got a chilling text message: "You and your family will be killed very slowly."

A week earlier, Tricia Raffensperger, wife of Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, had received another anonymous text: "We plan for the death of you and your family every day." (https://morningshots.thebulwark.com/p/who-would-you-shoot)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: steve ridgway on June 13, 2021, 09:48:33 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on June 13, 2021, 08:06:25 AM
More fundamentally, what is the cause of the frustration of so many Americans?  OK, they are mostly White, older, and small-town, but can they all be dismissed as just racists?  Or is there something also at work?  My hypothesis is that much of the frustration is based on the stagnation of incomes and the conviction their children will not better off than they have been.  (Not to say the racism is real enough.)

Well yes - what happened to optimism, progress, the future?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: ritter on June 13, 2021, 09:59:31 AM
Quote from: steve ridgway on June 13, 2021, 09:48:33 AM
Well yes - what happened to optimism, progress, the future?
Perhaps it's simply the effect of the law of diminishing marginal returns?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on June 13, 2021, 11:11:51 AM
Quote from: steve ridgway on June 13, 2021, 09:48:33 AM
Well yes - what happened to optimism, progress, the future?

     The left spends much of its energy defending its bastions in Blue states and Blue fortresses in Red states. They should do that, but they also need to extend their reach into the Red wastelands by offering tangible benefits in the form of infrastructure, including broadband connections that allow Red Zoners to integrate with the national economy to their benefit. The wave of the future will encompass a wider geography for higher paying jobs, if that's the future we choose to build. 

     There's more to gain from economic carrots than the sticks of moral suasion IMV. We should recognize that economic decline, even if only measured in relative terms, is an important cause of the politics of despair. People will be less enthralled by demagogues if they see they have a brighter future.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on June 13, 2021, 12:07:47 PM
Quote from: drogulus on June 13, 2021, 11:11:51 AM
     The left spends much of its energy defending its bastions in Blue states and Blue fortresses in Red states. They should do that, but they also need to extend their reach into the Red wastelands by offering tangible benefits in the form of infrastructure, including broadband connections that allow Red Zoners to integrate with the national economy to their benefit. The wave of the future will encompass a wider geography for higher paying jobs, if that's the future we choose to build. 

     There's more to gain from economic carrots than the sticks of moral suasion IMV. We should recognize that economic decline, even if only measured in relative terms, is an important cause of the politics of despair. People will be less enthralled by demagogues if they see they have a brighter future.

Well golly.  I can't speak to the tactics of the "Left", (actually I think you mean the Democrats), but it seems clear that Republican gerrymandering and control of the electoral process are retarding progress in Red states.  This is what is stifling progressivism in the USA.

35+ years of trickle-down economics has ensured low wages for workers and stagnation for middle class.  The USA never needed supply-side economics, the Rich always had plenty of money.  Regressive taxation policies ensured the the Rich had even more money, but also ensured that the less privileged couldn't create the Demand that would motivate productive investment.  Instead you've only had stock markets and real estate bubbles.

If the yokels in the Red states want infrastructure then they tell their Republic representatives to loosen up, stop promoting Trump lies, and vote for Biden's infrastructure requests to the full extent.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on June 13, 2021, 02:14:08 PM
Quote from: Fëanor on June 13, 2021, 12:07:47 PM
Well golly.  I can't speak to the tactics of the "Left", (actually I think you mean the Democrats), but it seems clear that Republican gerrymandering and control of the electoral process are retarding progress in Red states.  This is what is stifling progressivism in the USA.



     Dems have to do what it takes to get as much built as they can before the window closes. If they do that they can pick up support for the other fights.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 13, 2021, 03:50:28 PM
Quote from: drogulus on June 13, 2021, 11:11:51 AM
     The left spends much of its energy defending its bastions in Blue states and Blue fortresses in Red states. They should do that, but they also need to extend their reach into the Red wastelands by offering tangible benefits in the form of infrastructure, including broadband connections that allow Red Zoners to integrate with the national economy to their benefit. The wave of the future will encompass a wider geography for higher paying jobs, if that's the future we choose to build. 

     There's more to gain from economic carrots than the sticks of moral suasion IMV. We should recognize that economic decline, even if only measured in relative terms, is an important cause of the politics of despair. People will be less enthralled by demagogues if they see they have a brighter future.

Would have made a difference in 1930's Deutschland.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on June 13, 2021, 06:55:58 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 13, 2021, 03:50:28 PM
Would have made a difference in 1930's Deutschland.

Wow, topsy turvy day, Droggy is the optimist and Henning the cynic. 

IMO, things aren't looking good for American democracy, let alone the Democratic agenda.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on June 14, 2021, 03:48:38 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 13, 2021, 03:50:28 PM
Quote from: drogulus on June 13, 2021, 11:11:51 AM
...
     There's more to gain from economic carrots than the sticks of moral suasion IMV. We should recognize that economic decline, even if only measured in relative terms, is an important cause of the politics of despair. People will be less enthralled by demagogues if they see they have a brighter future.

Would have made a difference in 1930's Deutschland.

But "Deutschland" had nothing in the way of carrots to offer.  Germany was broke and still technically owing reparation for WWI.  Germany was funding reparations ultimately from US loans but when the Depression hit, the USA ending the loans.  Both Communists and Nazis made big gains;  neither really had anything to offer except demagoguery.  But the Nazis got the backing of other conservative parities;  Hitler was made Chancellor and got President Hindenburg to use Presidential emergency powers to get rid of the Communists from the Reichstag and stifle the press.  Germany went from democracy to totalitarianism in a few months.

The USA has no comparable Presidential emergency power to those of Weimar -- thanks goodness for that:  imagine Trump with those emergency powers?   >:D

The USA is not broke;  it is awash with Rich money without useful occupation.  The Rich must put aside their selfish greed, OR be forced to do so by the popular will.  The irony is, I've no doubt, if the working and middle classes were better off, plenty would trickle up to the Rich.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on June 14, 2021, 06:39:12 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on June 13, 2021, 08:06:25 AM
Historically and 'till the present the Americans have been obsessed with "liberty" and "rugged individualism" in the sense of I can do whatever I want with little regard for societal good ...
This is a dark view of some of the most important American values. Fewer people take it past that point, that is, past the NAP (non-aggression principle) point. That would just be antisocial tendencies, which is a smallish percentage of the population. They'll likely end up in prison.

Of course those principles are important- what is the opposite? Reliance on the government and helplessness to direct your own life? Doesn't sound like a better alternative.

It's very important as it is one of the reasons why America is responsible for so much innovation throughout its years.


Quote from: Fëanor on June 13, 2021, 08:06:25 AM
More fundamentally, what is the cause of the frustration of so many Americans?  OK, they are mostly White, older, and small-town, but can they all be dismissed as just racists?  Or is there something also at work?  My hypothesis is that much of the frustration is based on the stagnation of incomes and the conviction their children will not better off than they have been.  (Not to say the racism is real enough.)
I'd say this is likely accurate, but it seems like you could get the answers for this more in detail somewhere if you looked for it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on June 14, 2021, 06:57:55 AM
Quote from: Daverz on June 13, 2021, 06:55:58 PM
Wow, topsy turvy day, Droggy is the optimist and Henning the cynic. 

IMO, things aren't looking good for American democracy, let alone the Democratic agenda.

+1 with exclamation marks.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on June 14, 2021, 07:06:25 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on June 14, 2021, 03:48:38 AM


But "Deutschland" had nothing in the way of carrots to offer.

     Yet it did, but only after the NAZIs decided to stop running out of money. If money run outs were real things depressions could never end. I mean, howyougonna payforit?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on June 15, 2021, 10:55:50 AM
     Does the Welfare State Make Countries Richer? (https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:mWjrS755iJkJ:https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-06-06/the-big-question-does-social-welfare-spending-make-countries-richer+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-b-1-d)

Justin Fox: The coronavirus pandemic has caused a dramatic expansion in government-funded social welfare programs in many countries, including the United States. A major theme of your new book, "Making Social Spending Work" — as well as some of your earlier work — is that the welfare state is a free lunch. What do you mean by that?

Peter Lindert, Distinguished Professor of Economics, Emeritus, University of California at Davis: It's a free lunch in the sense that it doesn't lower our average incomes, but at the same time it does provide other things such as more equality, cleaner government, etc. Lifespans are longer, welfare states do not run bigger deficits, poverty is lower.


     I don't see how a welfare state could run a bigger deficit. Welfare dollars aren't going to come back any slower than other dollars. In fact, they will be spent at close to 100% by beneficiaries, so welfare dollars will recycle via taxation at least as efficiently as other dollars.

     To the extent that welfare spending acts to prop up capitalism by countering its tendency to impoverish its customers I'd say yes, welfare spending is enriching in its aggregate effects on the economy. However much people want to justify welfare states on ethical grounds, the only reason they could ever become the chosen path as countries become rich is good old fashioned brute force economics.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on June 17, 2021, 10:55:21 AM
Quote from: drogulus on June 15, 2021, 10:55:50 AM
...
     To the extent that welfare spending acts to prop up capitalism by countering its tendency to impoverish its customers I'd say yes, welfare spending is enriching in its aggregate effects on the economy. However much people want to justify welfare states on ethical grounds, the only reason they could ever become the chosen path as countries become rich is good old fashioned brute force economics.

In the first place there is no particular conflict or contradiction between either a market economy ort capitalism -- both continue to work in a welfare state.

Laissez faire capitalism does tend to concentrate wealth and power;  this may make an economy "richer" in terms of total GDP but give a hugely disproportionate share to the Rich.  But this is likely to, and I'd argue has already, increased social/political instability.

OTOH laissez faire might not even do this because better wealth distribution might increase overall Demand by giving typical citizens more purchasing power.  Ironically this could well benefit the Rich in the longer run thanks to the tendency for money to trickle up.

Thus there is no reason to assume the welfarism is justified only by ethics or altruism:  it likely makes very good sense in terms of fundamental economics.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 17, 2021, 01:32:36 PM
Quote from: Florestan on June 17, 2021, 12:58:39 PM
I am White, Male, Heterosexual and Christian...

What was the question?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on July 20, 2021, 06:53:14 AM
First, this and subsequent sentences for insurrectionists should drive a stake through the notion that the marauders were nothing more than tourists, as Rep. Andrew S. Clyde (R-Ga.) falsely declared. The disgraced former president's suggestion that these were "very special" people who posed "zero threat" is another lie among many. It bears repeating in news coverage that Republicans have continued to spread misinformation about the conduct of these cult members. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/07/20/what-sentencing-jan-6-insurrections-portends/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on July 23, 2021, 03:36:46 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 17, 2021, 01:32:36 PM
What was the question?
What is an oppressor?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on July 23, 2021, 03:46:57 AM
So, this person gets an 8 month sentence:  https://www.politico.com/news/2021/07/19/capitol-riot-first-felony-sentence-500149

and this person gets 5 years?  https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/texas-woman-sentenced-five-years-trying-vote-gets-new-appeal-n1262691

:-\

From the article:

"Since her arrest, Grinter said Mason has become a "tireless" voting rights advocate.

"It's really important to her that people not see her story and get discouraged from going to the ballot box, because she feels like that's exactly what the Tarrant County district attorney wants to have happen," she said."


Something to think about...

PD

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Que on July 23, 2021, 04:17:46 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on July 23, 2021, 03:46:57 AM
and this person gets 5 years?  https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/texas-woman-sentenced-five-years-trying-vote-gets-new-appeal-n1262691

:-\

From the article:

"Since her arrest, Grinter said Mason has become a "tireless" voting rights advocate.

"It's really important to her that people not see her story and get discouraged from going to the ballot box, because she feels like that's exactly what the Tarrant County district attorney wants to have happen," she said."


Something to think about...

PD

Would she have been sentenced in this way, or even prosecuted if she would have been white?  ::)

If you would want to discourage black people from voting, a case like this seems very effective...

And:

https://theappeal.org/texas-da-who-sent-woman-to-prison-for-five-years-for-voting-made-her-own-election-mistake/

DA's looking for "easy" scores to look "though" while crime rates are going through the roof.

As I said before: you guys live in a scary country....
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on July 24, 2021, 12:36:44 PM
Quote from: Que on July 23, 2021, 04:17:46 AM
As I said before: you guys live in a scary country....


It's the people, mostly ....

America's Imperfect Founding (https://thebulwark.com/americas-imperfect-founding/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on July 24, 2021, 01:28:46 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on July 24, 2021, 12:36:44 PM
It's the people, mostly ....

America's Imperfect Founding (https://thebulwark.com/americas-imperfect-founding/)
Thank you for that link Karl...quite interesting.  I'll give it a better and more complete reading tomorrow.

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on July 24, 2021, 03:34:42 PM
Quote from: Que on July 23, 2021, 04:17:46 AM
Would she have been sentenced in this way, or even prosecuted if she would have been white?  ::)

If you would want to discourage black people from voting, a case like this seems very effective...

And:

https://theappeal.org/texas-da-who-sent-woman-to-prison-for-five-years-for-voting-made-her-own-election-mistake/


No doubt you were implying this, but just to underline it: The sentences are specifically designed as a threat to black people to keep them from voting. A white woman in Pennsylvania who intentionally voted three times for Trump was sentenced to three days in jail. In Texas she would probably have gotten off with zero. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on July 25, 2021, 07:07:51 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on July 24, 2021, 12:36:44 PM
It's the people, mostly ....

America's Imperfect Founding (https://thebulwark.com/americas-imperfect-founding/)

As foreigner with a slightly sophomoric understanding of American history, it has been clear to me for a long time that the USA is very imperfect democracy.  It sad enough to understand the "Founding Father" feared a more thorough democracy and designed the Constitution accordingly;  it sadder and scary to understand that a lot of people are still happy with that state of affairs.

Also, I've understood for decades that the further threat to American democracy comes from the Right, not the Left.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on July 25, 2021, 07:44:50 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on June 17, 2021, 10:55:21 AM
In the first place there is no particular conflict or contradiction between either a market economy ort capitalism -- both continue to work in a welfare state.

Laissez faire capitalism does tend to concentrate wealth and power;  this may make an economy "richer" in terms of total GDP but give a hugely disproportionate share to the Rich.  But this is likely to, and I'd argue has already, increased social/political instability.

OTOH laissez faire might not even do this because better wealth distribution might increase overall Demand by giving typical citizens more purchasing power.  Ironically this could well benefit the Rich in the longer run thanks to the tendency for money to trickle up.

Thus there is no reason to assume the welfarism is justified only by ethics or altruism:  it likely makes very good sense in terms of fundamental economics.



Most economists tend to affirm a trade off between the size of entire pie (nat'l asset/economy) and equality in the distribution of the pie. Thus, enhancing the latter tends to decrease, not increase, the former in long term over all. Enhancement of the former generally decreases the latter, vice versa. You are right about the enhanced demand by active redistribution. But the decline in incentives for supply/production could be disproportionately larger. I am not saying that the sound economy is more important than equality. They are apples and oranges. As for the equality/stability connection, it is not very simple.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on July 26, 2021, 05:38:45 AM
As conservative writer David French puts it, "you can't fact-check, plead, or argue a person out of a conspiracy, because you're trying to fact-check, plead, and argue them out of their community."

How Trumpists Prey on Loneliness, and Loneliness Preys on Trumpists (https://www.thedailybeast.com/how-trumpists-prey-on-loneliness-and-loneliness-preys-on-trumpists?ref=home)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on July 26, 2021, 06:52:00 AM
Quote from: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on July 25, 2021, 07:44:50 AM
Most economists tend to affirm a trade off between the size of entire pie (nat'l asset/economy) and equality in the distribution of the pie. Thus, enhancing the latter tends to decrease, not increase, the former in long term over all. Enhancement of the former generally decreases the latter, vice versa. You are right about the enhanced demand by active redistribution. But the decline in incentives for supply/production could be disproportionately larger. I am not saying that the sound economy is more important than equality. They are apples and oranges. As for the equality/stability connection, it is not very simple.

You are tending to the "Neo-classical" economic position.  I think it is overstate.  In case of strictly enforced equality, (which has never really happened anywhere), it would be true but otherwise not so much.

The role on "incentives", especially in the form of low taxes on the wealthy, is definitely overstated.  The US economy was never been better in recent history than in the '50s when the highest marginal rate was 91% (vs. 35% today).  The Rich do not invest because they as spare cash in their accounts, they make productive investments when they perceive strong demand for goods or services.  The USA is awash with cash today but much so-called investment is going into one or another form of speculation, i.e. acquisition of existing asset in hope of appreciation.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on July 26, 2021, 07:09:29 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on July 26, 2021, 06:52:00 AMThe role on "incentives", especially in the form of low taxes on the wealthy, is definitely overstated.  The US economy was never been better in recent history than in the '50s when the highest marginal rate was 91% (vs. 35% today).  The Rich do not invest because they as spare cash in their accounts, they make productive investments when they perceive strong demand for goods or services.  The USA is awash with cash today but much so-called investment is going into one or another form of speculation, i.e. acquisition of existing asset in hope of appreciation.

Quite so. The primary motivation for business investment is potential customers with cash in their pockets. During the period of time when mean wages grew with productivity (after WWII until the mid 70's) economic growth in the U.S. was huge. When this trend ended, wages became flat and larger and larger fraction of revenue went to investors, economic growth became anemic.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on July 26, 2021, 07:18:37 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on July 26, 2021, 06:52:00 AM
You are tending to the "Neo-classical" economic position.  I think it is overstate.  In case of strictly enforced equality, (which has never really happened anywhere), it would be true but otherwise not so much.

The role on "incentives", especially in the form of low taxes on the wealthy, is definitely overstated.  The US economy was never been better in recent history than in the '50s when the highest marginal rate was 91% (vs. 35% today).  The Rich do not invest because they as spare cash in their accounts, they make productive investments when they perceive strong demand for goods or services.  The USA is awash with cash today but much so-called investment is going into one or another form of speculation, i.e. acquisition of existing asset in hope of appreciation.

There are several college text books of Microeconomics and Public Finance from major academic publishers. Most of them explain/affirm a tradeoff between the economic performance and the size of redistribution in "long term." I don't recall any of them suggesting that the two go together although the economy could be additionally influenced by many factors other than redistribution. Also, this is the case for liberal, as well as conservative, economists.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on July 26, 2021, 02:34:12 PM
I've been thinking about the future. Has anyone else come to the conclusion that if a Republican wins the WH in 2024, that person will immediately pardon all of the insurrectionsists?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on July 26, 2021, 04:29:44 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on July 26, 2021, 02:34:12 PM
I've been thinking about the future. Has anyone else come to the conclusion that if a Republican wins the WH in 2024, that person will immediately pardon all of the insurrectionsists?

I'm not expecting much in the way of consequences in any case. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Que on July 26, 2021, 10:33:04 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on July 24, 2021, 12:36:44 PM
It's the people, mostly ....

America's Imperfect Founding (https://thebulwark.com/americas-imperfect-founding/)

I totally agree with that prespective . It's unfortunate that sofar the (appeal of the) myth seems to be more stronger than reality...  For me as an outsider, it seems that what the US needs most is some critical self reflection, including the removal of the Constitution and the Founding Fathers from their pedestals. They were a product of their times, with the imperfections that came with it. But the myth is a powerful tool in the hands of those who benefit from keeping things the way they are.

Black Lives Matter might be a game changer! Plus the rude awakening from the Imperial Dream. Although the example of the UK shows that that can also lead to an irrational clinging on to the past and self isolation.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Que on July 26, 2021, 10:43:15 PM
Since the fight against the pandemic seems to be politised in the US, I'm posting here.

I'm absolutely baffled by the anti-vax campaigns from (some?) Republican quarters!

How did they switch from Trump's championing the production of vaccines to this? And to what political gain?  ???

Also: what are the ramifications, political and otherwise? 
How many Americans are persuaded not to get vaccinated? I read up to half of all Republican voters?

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on July 26, 2021, 11:56:28 PM
Well, some Republican leaders are attempting to make a U-turn on this anti-vaccine position, but I guess it's a little too late.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on July 27, 2021, 03:04:34 AM
Quote from: Que on July 26, 2021, 10:33:04 PM
I totally agree with that prespective . It's unfortunate that sofar the (appeal of the) myth seems to be more stronger than reality...  For me as an outsider, it seems that what the US needs most is some critical self reflection, including the removal of the Constitution and the Founding Fathers from their pedestals. They were a product of their times, with the imperfections that came with it. But the myth is a powerful tool in the hands of those who benefit from keeping things the way they are.

Black Lives Matter might be a game changer! Plus the rude awakening from the Imperial Dream. Although the example of the UK shows that that can also lead to an irrational clinging on to the past and self isolation.

Part of our present severe dysfunction is the MAGA-verse's delusional clinging on to the "Whites on Top, baby!" past
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Stürmisch Bewegt on July 27, 2021, 04:42:08 AM
No wonder we're the "Home of the Brave," you have to be to live in the bullet-riddled Hell Hole we have created :  https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9826297/US-records-one-shooting-12-minutes-915-shootings-single-week-leaves-430-dead.html
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on July 27, 2021, 08:22:16 AM
Quote from: Que on July 26, 2021, 10:43:15 PM
I'm absolutely baffled by the anti-vax campaigns from (some?) Republican quarters!

Conservative media has created a narrative that Biden and other liberals want to encroach upon their civil liberties.  Since their previous tactic was to downplay how severe the pandemic is, and how liberals want to ruin the economy and infringe upon personal liberties by forcing shut downs and mask wearing, anti-vax messaging is actually a natural extension of the disinformation campaign.

I see a natural progression that started when Trump downplayed covid so long ago, and through that inertia and saving face it ended up politicizing a medical matter so severely that there is no recovering from it.  BTW just to show how hypocritical they all can be, Fox News has a vaccine passport mandate to work in the building.  All the anchors and hosts are vaccinated.  Most anti-vax politicians are vaccinated.  Rudolph Murdock, who controls a monopoly on mainstream conservative media, was one of the first to be vaccinated.

Now that was on the mainstream front.  There is a doctor in Florida that was responsible for generating most of the truly egregious anti-vax nonsense on FB.  Since Trump spent years convincing his base that the mainstream media couldn't be trusted, many of his followers are more likely to trust FB or relatives that get their information from FB than from more reasonable sources.  Disinformation is a real threat to America right now.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on July 28, 2021, 08:12:10 AM
Quote from: DavidW on July 27, 2021, 08:22:16 AM
Conservative media has created a narrative that Biden and other liberals want to encroach upon their civil liberties.  Since their previous tactic was to downplay how severe the pandemic is, and how liberals want to ruin the economy and infringe upon personal liberties by forcing shut downs and mask wearing, anti-vax messaging is actually a natural extension of the disinformation campaign.

I see a natural progression that started when Trump downplayed covid so long ago, and through that inertia and saving face it ended up politicizing a medical matter so severely that there is no recovering from it.  BTW just to show how hypocritical they all can be, Fox News has a vaccine passport mandate to work in the building.  All the anchors and hosts are vaccinated.  Most anti-vax politicians are vaccinated.  Rudolph Murdock, who controls a monopoly on mainstream conservative media, was one of the first to be vaccinated.

Now that was on the mainstream front.  There is a doctor in Florida that was responsible for generating most of the truly egregious anti-vax nonsense on FB.  Since Trump spent years convincing his base that the mainstream media couldn't be trusted, many of his followers are more likely to trust FB or relatives that get their information from FB than from more reasonable sources.  Disinformation is a real threat to America right now.


It certainly is. What simultaneously baffles and repels me is the fact that I have friends and siblings, and we all grew up in the greater NYC area, and so grew up knowing what a vile character and bullshitter the disgraced former president is ... and yet these near and dear ones have somehow acquired a taste for consuming the bullshit.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on July 30, 2021, 07:14:02 AM
Quote from: Que on July 26, 2021, 10:33:04 PM
I totally agree with that prespective . It's unfortunate that sofar the (appeal of the) myth seems to be more stronger than reality...  For me as an outsider, it seems that what the US needs most is some critical self reflection, including the removal of the Constitution and the Founding Fathers from their pedestals. They were a product of their times, with the imperfections that came with it. But the myth is a powerful tool in the hands of those who benefit from keeping things the way they are.

Black Lives Matter might be a game changer! Plus the rude awakening from the Imperial Dream. Although the example of the UK shows that that can also lead to an irrational clinging on to the past and self isolation.
So, is it the kind of post-Marxist, critical theory-type ideology with which you want to replace the liberal vision of the constitution? It does seem that liberalism is under fire as impartiality, equality before the law, rationality as a legal and philosophical concept, are seen as "white." The idea of progress has to be thrown away with the constitution, if the vision of liberalism cannot simply be expanded to include all people. The idea I see, with intersectionality, liberation and oppression-focused ideologies, is that we humans cannot be reasonable, in terms of universality. And now everything is "racial," since it's the main hermeneutic by which we can know our relationships and society.
But there's a warning from conservatives like Glenn Loury. It's this: do you want the majority to see themselves in racial terms, while advancing this project of getting them to admit their culpability in white supremacy? What could go wrong?
I very much doubt that this is popular amongst the communities that so-called leftists think it is.  And personally, I don't think it's progressive at all. Tearing down the constitution for what? And for whom? The idea behind it seems like a con to me. It's powerful people enriching themselves by using people. Meanwhile, nothing changes in the way that corporations are really run. But things will definitely get worse and it's a dangerous gamble. Just my two cents.
To me, the real game is the way global wealth is concentrated and the way we humans are fast using up the world's resources and adding to global warming.
Another point is how China is laughing at the U.S. The CCP loves power too and laughs at the so- called failure of liberal values. This it can crow about as it elbows it's way towards more domination.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on July 31, 2021, 09:12:22 AM
Quote from: milk on July 30, 2021, 07:14:02 AM
So, is it the kind of post-Marxist, critical theory-type ideology with which you want to replace the liberal vision of the constitution? It does seem that liberalism is under fire as impartiality, equality before the law, rationality as a legal and philosophical concept, are seen as "white." The idea of progress has to be thrown away with the constitution, if the vision of liberalism cannot simply be expanded to include all people. The idea I see, with intersectionality, liberation and oppression-focused ideologies, is that we humans cannot be reasonable, in terms of universality. And now everything is "racial," since it's the main hermeneutic by which we can know our relationships and society.
But there's a warning from conservatives like Glenn Loury. It's this: do you want the majority to see themselves in racial terms, while advancing this project of getting them to admit their culpability in white supremacy? What could go wrong?
I very much doubt that this is popular amongst the communities that so-called leftists think it is.  And personally, I don't think it's progressive at all. Tearing down the constitution for what? And for whom? The idea behind it seems like a con to me. It's powerful people enriching themselves by using people. Meanwhile, nothing changes in the way that corporations are really run. But things will definitely get worse and it's a dangerous gamble. Just my two cents.
To me, the real game is the way global wealth is concentrated and the way we humans are fast using up the world's resources and adding to global warming.
Another point is how China is laughing at the U.S. The CCP loves power too and laughs at the so- called failure of liberal values. This it can crow about as it elbows it's way towards more domination.
Yeah... to put it in other words, Intersectionalism is pretty much just tribalism. Divide and conquer.

And who will conquer us when we're divided? Seems like the wealthy of this country will extend their power, and eventually China, who the wealthy are in bed with. So that's a great world that we should live in. Screw human rights. China looooves this internal conflict.

It's funny how little wealth inheritance is talked about in wokeism/Intersectionalism, when it makes up (along with genetics) probably over 90% of what you'd call "privilege." It's designed to tell poor white conservatives that they should feel like oppressors even though they live in a small trailer in the middle of the woods.  :P

Actually, recently was discussing issues of poverty with someone online (a white guy who didn't deny being from an upper middle class background), and I talked about my observations about the situation of non-white people that I grew up around, and he threw the "you can't say anything because of your white privilege" card at me. (Probably because I mentioned that mostly things were about the same for all of us, it conflicted with his narrative). I'm sorry, but was he the one that talked to them every day for years and heard everything they had to say? Yet he thinks he can throw some nebulous concept at me to discredit my actual experience.

Too many people think they can sit in their ivory towers and tell other societies how things are and what they should do, while no one elected outsiders as spokespeople.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: North Star on July 31, 2021, 01:07:03 PM
Quote from: milk on July 30, 2021, 07:14:02 AM
So, is it the kind of post-Marxist, critical theory-type ideology with which you want to replace the liberal vision of the constitution? It does seem that liberalism is under fire
Definitely, as seen in e.g. the Capitol Hill siege by far-right conservatives.
Quoteas impartiality, equality before the law, rationality as a legal and philosophical concept, are seen as "white."
This sounds to me like you're complaining that black people are making too much noise about being killed by the police for no reason, getting their votes disenfranchised, and getting disproportionately harsher sentences for same crimes as white people.
QuoteThe idea of progress has to be thrown away with the constitution, if the vision of liberalism cannot simply be expanded to include all people.
The constitution that takes into account how many representatives each state gets in the house for their slave population, and which tells of the right of a well-regulated militia to bear arms? Yeah, a sacred document that should be worshipped until the end of time for sure, it's not like nobody's tried to edit it or add something to it before.

QuoteThe idea I see, with intersectionality, liberation and oppression-focused ideologies, is that we humans cannot be reasonable, in terms of universality. And now everything is "racial," since it's the main hermeneutic by which we can know our relationships and society.
But there's a warning from conservatives like Glenn Loury. It's this: do you want the majority to see themselves in racial terms, while advancing this project of getting them to admit their culpability in white supremacy? What could go wrong?
Everything has been very 'racial' for black people, Native Americans, Mexicans, South Americans, Japanese, etc. in the US since forever. Your answer seems to be that they should just mind their place.

QuoteI very much doubt that this is popular amongst the communities that so-called leftists think it is.  And personally, I don't think it's progressive at all. Tearing down the constitution for what? And for whom? The idea behind it seems like a con to me. It's powerful people enriching themselves by using people. Meanwhile, nothing changes in the way that corporations are really run. But things will definitely get worse and it's a dangerous gamble. Just my two cents.
To me, the real game is the way global wealth is concentrated and the way we humans are fast using up the world's resources and adding to global warming.
Another point is how China is laughing at the U.S. The CCP loves power too and laughs at the so- called failure of liberal values. This it can crow about as it elbows it's way towards more domination.
Income tax, capital gains tax, wealth tax, inheritance tax, VAT, health insurance, tuition payments are certainly also issues, and I agree that if every nonwhite in the US was part of the wealthiest 1% or 10%, much of their struggle would disappear. That is not going to happen anytime soon though, and fixing these things on the financial side (which would require some sort of supermajority of the left side of Democrats in House and Senate) doesn't mean that systemic racism doesn't matter anymore.



Quote from: greg on July 31, 2021, 09:12:22 AMIt's funny how little wealth inheritance is talked about in wokeism/Intersectionalism
You should be happy about the Biden administration's inheritance tax plan then, Greg - must have missed your post on it. :)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on July 31, 2021, 06:16:05 PM
Quote from: North Star on July 31, 2021, 01:07:03 PM
You should be happy about the Biden administration's inheritance tax plan then, Greg - must have missed your post on it. :)
Have not heard about it, this sounds like possibly a great thing!  :)

The reason I like the idea is because I like equal opportunity... after that things are based on merit/hard work, that should be the judge. I don't like equity (forced equal outcome), or unfair/rigged competitions. Kids shouldn't get a free ride in life while others have to suffer.

So yeah, props to Biden on this.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on August 01, 2021, 07:41:33 AM
Quote from: North Star on July 31, 2021, 01:07:03 PM
Definitely, as seen in e.g. the Capitol Hill siege by far-right conservatives.
non sequitur. Are you assuming I agree with them? I see your ill-will.
Quote from: North Star on July 31, 2021, 01:07:03 PM
This sounds to me like you're complaining that black people are making too much noise about being killed by the police for no reason, getting their votes disenfranchised, and getting disproportionately harsher sentences for same crimes as white people.
I don't understand much of your post. I referenced liberal concepts in the law and liberalism in general. You said I was complaining about black people? huh? I recommend you pause in the future before going down such a path. Or justify your slimy accusations.
Quote from: North Star on July 31, 2021, 01:07:03 PM
The constitution that takes into account how many representatives each state gets in the house for their slave population, and which tells of the right of a well-regulated militia to bear arms?
Yeah, a sacred document that should be worshipped until the end of time for sure, it's not like nobody's tried to edit it or add something to it before.
Right. Don't remove it.
Quote from: North Star on July 31, 2021, 01:07:03 PM
Everything has been very 'racial' for black people, Native Americans, Mexicans, South Americans, Japanese, etc. in the US since forever. Your answer seems to be that they should just mind their place.
Yeah, if you want to be a jerk, you could put it like that, because who would tell people to "mind their place" except an awful person in your fantasy. How about a little more charity. If you disagree, try going to the substance. There are many commenters from many ethnic groups that do see critical theories in a very negative light. You immediately go to racial insults because you don't seem very serious about arguing the points.
Quote from: North Star on July 31, 2021, 01:07:03 PM
Income tax, capital gains tax, wealth tax, inheritance tax, VAT, health insurance, tuition payments are certainly also issues, and I agree that if every nonwhite in the US was part of the wealthiest 1% or 10%, much of their struggle would disappear. That is not going to happen anytime soon though, and fixing these things on the financial side (which would require some sort of supermajority of the left side of Democrats in House and Senate) doesn't mean that systemic racism doesn't matter anymore.
Not everybody agrees with your concepts. You are going to have to convince people of your concepts rather than telling them that they're horrible evil people for wanting the explanations. I just find it very cowardly to throw accusations and insults at people so you never have to explain what you're talking about in policy terms. There are many prominent people from all backgrounds that just disagree with you. Be charitable and discuss what it is you believe. 


Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on August 01, 2021, 10:48:21 AM
'Nothing actually changes': Boston tech workers of color blast the sector's attempts to be antiracist (https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/07/31/business/nothing-actually-changes-boston-tech-workers-color-blast-sectors-attempts-be-antiracist/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on August 03, 2021, 09:32:11 PM
TUCKER CARLSON IS JOINING THE RIGHT-WING PARADE TO "ILLIBERAL" HUNGARY
The Fox News star is hosting his prime-time show and scheduled to speak at a far-right conference in Hungary, where Viktor Orbán's appeals to Christian nationalism have drawn support from the American right. (https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/08/tucker-carlson-right-wing-parade-hungary)

"Over the past few years, Hungary––led by its nationalistic and authoritarian ruler Viktor Orbán––has become a sort of mecca for the American far right, with conservative pundits embarking on pilgrimages to the Central European nation. Tucker Carlson has now joined his peers in traveling to Budapest in support of Orbán's regime. "We're in Budapest all this week for Tucker Carlson Tonight and a documentary for Tucker Carlson Originals," the Fox News host tweeted on Monday. That night, Carlson teased his show's coverage for the coming days. "If you care about Western civilization and democracy and families, and the ferocious assault on all three of those things by the leaders of our global institutions, you should know what is happening here right now," he said. The Hungarian prime minister also shared a photo of himself and Carlson posing next to each other with the caption, "Tucker Carlson Today," which is the name of the news host's online talk show on Fox Nation.

While in Budapest, Carlson is scheduled to address a far-right conference on Saturday organized by the Mathias Corvinus Collegium (MCC), with a speech entitled "The World According to Tucker Carlson," Talking Points Memo noted. Over the past couple of years, Orbán's government has reportedly shelled out considerable sums of money in his effort to build up Hungary as a destination for the global right. In June, The New York Times reported that Orbán used $1.7 billion in government money and assets to fund MCC, an educational foundation dedicated to advancing Orbán's brand of nationalism. Additionally, OpenSecrets investigative researcher Anna Massoglia reported this week that having Carlson interview Orbán on Fox News was part of a "foreign influence" operation in which the Hungarian government paid a D.C.–based lobbying firm $265,000 in 2019."[...]
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on August 10, 2021, 08:51:09 AM
Worth remembering, especially in the light of 6 January.

Dan Rather, 9 Aug 2016:

"No trying-to-be objective and fair journalist, no citizen who cares about the country and its future can ignore what Donald Trump said today. When he suggested that "The Second Amendment People" can stop Hillary Clinton he crossed a line with dangerous potential. By any objective analysis, this is a new low and unprecedented in the history of American presidential politics.  This is no longer about policy, civility, decency or even temperament. This is a direct threat of violence against a political rival.  It is not just against the norms of American politics, it raises a serious question of whether it is against the law.  If any other citizen had said this about a Presidential candidate, would the Secret Service be investigating?

"Candidate Trump will undoubtably issue an explanation; some of his surrogates are already engaged in trying to gloss it over, but once the words are out there they cannot be taken back.  That is what inciting violence means. 

"To anyone who still pretends this is a normal election of Republican against Democrat, history is watching.  And I suspect its verdict will be harsh.  Many have tried to do a side-shuffle and issue statements saying they strongly disagree with his rhetoric but still support the candidate.  That is becoming woefully insufficient.  The rhetoric is the candidate.

"This cannot be treated as just another outrageous moment in the campaign.  We will see whether major newscasts explain how grave and unprecedented this is and whether the headlines in tomorrow's newspapers do it justice. We will soon know whether anyone who has publicly supported Trump explains how they can continue to do.

"We are a democratic republic governed by the rule of law. We are an honest, fair and decent people. In trying to come to terms with today's discouraging development the best I can do is to summon our greatest political poet Abraham Lincoln for perspective:

""We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battlefield and patriot grave to every living heart and hearthstone all over this broad land, will yet swell the chorus of the Union, when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature."
Lincoln used these stirring words to end his First Inaugural Address. It was the eve of the Civil War and sadly his call for sanity, cohesion and peace was met with horrific violence that almost left our precious Union asunder. We cannot let that happen again.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on August 10, 2021, 12:07:21 PM
A nice piece, especially for anyone still inclined to luxuriate in bothsiderism:

BENJAMIN PARKER: "For people determined not to give Democrats credit for policing their own side, you could say that it was helpful that in both cases the person succeeding the beleaguered official was also going to be a Democrat. Then-Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton, a Democrat, appointed Tina Smith to fill out Franken's term, and New York Lt. Gov. Katie Hochul will take over for Cuomo as governor. So it's not as if the stakes were astronomically high for the Democrats seeking to oust Cuomo and Franken.

"But that also raises an interesting question: When the Republican party had an historically unpopular incumbent president and had the opportunity to impeach him and remove him from office not once—but twice!—why didn't they not do it? It's not as if removing Trump in 2019 would have made Hillary Clinton president—it would have made Mike Pence president, and this was before he had been unpersoned as a traitor."

Andrew Cuomo Resigned Because the Democrats Aren't a Cult (https://www.thebulwark.com/andrew-cuomo-resigned-because-the-democrats-arent-a-cult/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on August 11, 2021, 11:25:27 AM
"Here Are The Major Amtrak Upgrades Proposed In Biden's $2 Trillion Infrastructure Plan":

- https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicholasreimann/2021/04/01/here-are-the-major-amtrak-upgrades-proposed-in-bidens-2-trillion-infrastructure-plan/?sh=2c482fa3532e
- https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/02/us/politics/amtrak-trains-infrastructure.html
("Public buses, subways and trains are also set to receive $39 billion in new funding under the bill").






Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on August 11, 2021, 09:39:15 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 10, 2021, 12:07:21 PM
A nice piece, especially for anyone still inclined to luxuriate in bothsiderism:

BENJAMIN PARKER: "For people determined not to give Democrats credit for policing their own side, you could say that it was helpful that in both cases the person succeeding the beleaguered official was also going to be a Democrat. Then-Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton, a Democrat, appointed Tina Smith to fill out Franken's term, and New York Lt. Gov. Katie Hochul will take over for Cuomo as governor. So it's not as if the stakes were astronomically high for the Democrats seeking to oust Cuomo and Franken.

"But that also raises an interesting question: When the Republican party had an historically unpopular incumbent president and had the opportunity to impeach him and remove him from office not once—but twice!—why didn't they not do it? It's not as if removing Trump in 2019 would have made Hillary Clinton president—it would have made Mike Pence president, and this was before he had been unpersoned as a traitor."

Andrew Cuomo Resigned Because the Democrats Aren't a Cult (https://www.thebulwark.com/andrew-cuomo-resigned-because-the-democrats-arent-a-cult/)
it's scary that Trump could return. It seems like the more unreasonable the right is, the more their constituents like them. The left is much more uneasily divided between factions with different inclinations. Off topic: I wonder if AOC will seek a Senate seat?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on August 12, 2021, 07:03:53 AM
What Orbán's Apologists Reveal About Themselves (https://www.thebulwark.com/what-orbans-apologists-reveal-about-themselves/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on August 13, 2021, 05:00:17 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 12, 2021, 07:03:53 AM
What Orbán's Apologists Reveal About Themselves (https://www.thebulwark.com/what-orbans-apologists-reveal-about-themselves/)
I went and read the conservative defense of Orban (https://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/tucker-carlson-budapest-viktor-orban-blowing-people-minds-david-frum/) and it's pretty scary. Liberalism is certainly under attack from the right and left. Of course, the point that's driving the left and right comes from real grievances and dissatisfaction. Dennis Prager, and the like, make a pretty good living off fear. It's so interesting how directly and specifically left and right wing culture name liberalism as a curse.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on August 15, 2021, 12:05:43 AM
Seems like the quick US leave from Afghanistan has been under-researched, and disastrous for a large part of the local population. In a matter of days/a couple of weeks, the Talibans are taking over the entire country again. Apparently at least Kabul suburbs now.

EDIT: Danish foreign minister and previous ditto are now openly critical towards the US administration not informing about the steps taken, or involving others in the decision-making to leave. This is extremely rare. DK is one of the countries that in relation to population has lost most soldiers in Afghanistan, so it's also a domestic issue here. But governments from both side of the political spectrum have been involved in the mission, so it's rather a problem for the "political establishment" generally, that so many died partly in vain - 37 in combat, 7 during their mission through accidents, sickness etc.

The only good thing about the 20 years of war, besides the elimination of the terrorist groups long ago, is probably that the educational level of parts of the population has been improved somewhat, and that a good deal of foreign money came into the country. Apparently Taliban says they'll allow girls going to school now, though it's difficult to say how much there actually is to this.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on August 15, 2021, 08:30:06 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on August 15, 2021, 12:05:43 AM
Seems like the quick US leave from Afghanistan has been under-researched, and disastrous for a large part of the local population. In a matter of days/a couple of weeks, the Talibans are taking over the entire country again. Apparently at least Kabul suburbs now.

EDIT: Danish foreign minister and previous ditto are now openly critical towards the US administration not informing about the steps taken, or involving others in the decision-making to leave. This is extremely rare. DK is one of the countries that in relation to population has lost most soldiers in Afghanistan, so it's also a domestic issue here. But governments from both side of the political spectrum have been involved in the mission, so it's rather a problem for the "political establishment" generally, that so many died partly in vain - 37 in combat, 7 during their mission through accidents, sickness etc.

The only good thing about the 20 years of war, besides the elimination of the terrorist groups long ago, is probably that the educational level of parts of the population has been improved somewhat, and that a good deal of foreign money came into the country. Apparently Taliban says they'll allow girls going to school now, though it's difficult to say how much there actually is to this.

A catastrophe on the part of the current Administration
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on August 15, 2021, 09:36:03 AM
Some of the thoughts here are that:

1) there'll be no stable, centralized control of all of Afghanistan by the Taliban; it will be a civil war at least to some degree, also with China and Russia supporting people who represent their interests; for example, they'll be afraid of terrorism spreading from Afghanistan to Southern Russia and the Uighurs. There will be atrocities from the new regime too.

2) the Taliban aren't used to being a government, and there are different fractions, including some with a somewhat more modern approach, such as the privileged exiles that have lived in Qatar and done negotiations there; some of them have put their children in ~Western elite schools, for example.

3) it seems that both recent US administrations have chosen to ignore intelligence advice about how things would be going, choosing a sortie in stead.

4) the 300,000 men strong, modernized Afghanistan army must have seen a huge number of defections in the last days.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Iota on August 15, 2021, 10:51:13 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on August 15, 2021, 09:36:03 AM
the 300,000 men strong, modernized Afghanistan army must have seen a huge number of defections in the last days.

There's an interesting/depressing article here (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-58187410) explaining why government forces who supposedly greatly outnumbered and outgunned the Taliban, fell so quickly.

Corruption is one of the problems, some commanders apparently claiming the salaries of troops that don't even exist, and even the Afghan army doesn't know how many troops it has (although I guess 'had' is the right tense to use now). But other factors covered in the article certainly played their part too.

One thing is clear, which is that the Western intervention papered over the cracks rather than effectively addressing the structural causes of the cracks. And as soon as they left and took their 'paper' with them, the cracks remain there as clear as ever and perhaps widening. Who knows where this is leading.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on August 15, 2021, 11:01:00 AM
A good article, it seems, from when prospects weren't overcome by the sudden events.

Among other things stating: "the Taliban is closer to a coalition of independent franchise holders loosely - and most probably temporarily - affiliated with one another .... the Afghan government, too, is as riven by local factional motivations. Afghanistan's shape changing history illustrates how families, tribes and even government officials have switched sides - often to ensure their own survival."

Maybe it will harder for Taliban to control for example the capital's younger, more well-educated classes. But then, in Iran things have remained by and large status quo as regards suppression, for decades, with a similar generation gap ...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on August 15, 2021, 12:39:48 PM
Afghanistan remains a tribe-centered, semi-literate society based, (as such societies usually are), on patronage and corruption and where "liberal" values hold little sway.  The Afghan governments since the US, Coalition invasion haven't been able to change the this fact to any significant degree.

Ironically maybe, the Taliban promises more unity and purpose based on religious conformity, (despite that the Taliban itself is by no means a unified, centrally directed organization).  Plus the Taliban does offer something that is highly persuasive -- the threat of vicious reprisal against anyone opposes it.

The situation has reminds me strongly of the collapse of Iraqi forces in the face of ISIS advance a few years ago.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on August 15, 2021, 02:39:53 PM
Among the things I've heard during NPR's non-stop coverage today:

A former Canadian ambassador saying that Pakistani military intelligence is a prime mover behind Taliban actions and a US trainer of the Afghan military saying: We built a national army for a nation that doesn't exist, modeled precisely on ours, a structure meaningless and foreign to the indigenous population.

Worst of all, in my view, we abandoned thousands of Afghans who worked for the US military and to whom we promised visas, along with their families, to torture and death. That's a national disgrace and an indelible stain on whatever honor the US pretends to. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on August 15, 2021, 11:53:59 PM
"This is not Saigon once again", they officially say ...

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on August 16, 2021, 04:39:15 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on August 15, 2021, 02:39:53 PM
Among the things I've heard during NPR's non-stop coverage today:

A former Canadian ambassador saying that Pakistani military intelligence is a prime mover behind Taliban actions and a US trainer of the Afghan military saying: We built a national army for a nation that doesn't exist, modeled precisely on ours, a structure meaningless and foreign to the indigenous population.

Worst of all, in my view, we abandoned thousands of Afghans who worked for the US military and to whom we promised visas, along with their families, to torture and death. That's a national disgrace and an indelible stain on whatever honor the US pretends to.

Yes, that's the worst of it.  Canada too has been too slow to offer asylum to their translator and other supporters of Canadian troop.  Only mitigating this injustice in a limited degree is that the Afghan state collapsed faster than expected.

But as we agreed above, Afghanistan isn't really a state, it's hodge-podge of tribal constituencies.  "Nation building" by an outsider is impossible:  a nation can only be built done by the natives themselves.  An outsider can help in some instances, but ultimately Afghans rejected this assistance.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on August 16, 2021, 06:52:48 AM
Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama, Trump, Biden. All of them. What a disgrace. Let me add Blair. The biggest booby prize has to go to W though. These are sad disgraceful times. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on August 16, 2021, 07:05:07 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on August 15, 2021, 02:39:53 PMWorst of all, in my view, we abandoned thousands of Afghans who worked for the US military and to whom we promised visas, along with their families, to torture and death. That's a national disgrace and an indelible stain on whatever honor the US pretends to.

That is the only thing I regret.  Those who worked with the U.S. military and NATO should have been brought out. That is Biden's failure. As far as the U.S. withdrawal and takeover by the Taliban, I see nothing to regret in that, except that it wasn't done sooner. The Taliban is the legitimate government of Afghanistan, to the extent that Afghanistan is a country and to the extent that the Taliban is a government. If the people living in that part of the world want a different future they have to make it themselves. Twenty years supposedly building a state that couldn't stand on its own long enough for U.S. troops to pull out.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on August 16, 2021, 07:12:42 AM
Quote from: milk on August 16, 2021, 06:52:48 AM
Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama, Trump, Biden. All of them. What a disgrace. Let me add Blair. The biggest booby prize has to go to W though. These are sad disgraceful times.

Which Clinton are you referring to?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on August 16, 2021, 11:19:45 AM
Macron has delivered a quite fine statesman speech about 11 minutes long to the French, about the situation. Commemorating the 90 fatalities, he stressed how the French military left Afghanistan in 2014, and discreetly suggested they seemed better prepared for a quick evacuation; 800, including 600 assisting Afghans are out, some dozens remain, protected by French troops, was the overall estimate. He thanked the US for helping the evacuation in recent days.

The oncoming refugee situation is obviously a big matter of concern in Europe, and Macron stressed the need for international work and pressure for human and women's rights in Afghanistan, and organizing/harmonizing of the refugee process on an EU level, where he also acknowledged the moral responsibilities of the West. He has contacted European leaders about it, and he also stated that Afghanistan is now facing many problems, plus prepared the French for the refugee issue.

The Danish government is met with local critique here for not being sufficiently prepared for the evacuation. In the past weeks they have been reluctant to acknowledge responsibility in helping Afghan assistants with asylum, making the current events even more disorganized. A hardline immigration policy became too immoral, according to many here, including me. However, in the last couple of days, some special airplanes and forces have allegedly helped to get out about 440, but some of them remain.

However, the moment a date for pull-out of foreign troops was fixed, back in 2020, the chaos should have been planned for, since the prospects were that Taliban didn't have any real obligations to follow, the foreign troops would just leave anyway.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on August 18, 2021, 10:00:56 AM
Beyond the blame game: 6 previous foreign ministers here in DK agree that the Afghanistan events will mark a shift: a marked strengthening of a more separate EU security policy, and probably extreme hesitations in involvement in any future nationbuilding- or military campaigns that aren't UN-supported or the result of direct NATO commitment. Since WWII, DK has always leaned towards the US and to some extent the UK in its security policies, as a counterweight to our strong, potentially domineering German neighbours, but this is likely to change one way or the other.

But what it means in relation to China (or Russia) is under debate; there has also been a shift recently towards a much more critical attitude towards China.

I suppose the US public also sense a generally lessened US interest in the Middle East, or fatigue about related nation-building projects, where it is difficult to find much success.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on August 18, 2021, 03:27:57 PM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on August 16, 2021, 07:12:42 AM
Which Clinton are you referring to?
I was thinking Bill. I mean, this is more on republicans and neocons. But Carter continued Reagan's policy vis a vis mujahideen. But Now that I think about it, Hillary was also more involved vis a vis the Obama years.
Biden gets the most credit for finally ending this. All these neocons tearing their collective hair out this week is disgusting. As if the last 20 years prove anything could be done to make anything better - even on the way out.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on August 19, 2021, 02:54:09 AM
The big question is: how on earth did the most formidable professional military force in history fail to destroy, during twenty full and long years, a gang of bearded, turbaned, sneaker-or-sandal-wearing guerillas armed with rifles or semi-automatic firearms?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on August 19, 2021, 04:55:40 AM
Quote from: Florestan on August 19, 2021, 02:54:09 AM
The big question is: how on earth did the most formidable professional military force in history fail to destroy, during twenty full and long years, a gang of bearded, turbaned, sneaker-or-sandal-wearing guerillas armed with rifles or semi-automatic firearms?

You don't know much about guerilla warfare, do you?  ::)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on August 19, 2021, 05:22:46 AM
I am a member of a military history group that has been discussing the situation.   A few of our members work at the pentagon and one is civilian instructor of strategy for the Marine Corps at Quantico. 

Although there is some disagreements the general consensus is:

The United States lost the war in 2006.  Instead of facing the reality the US spent fifteen years trying to turn things around.

There is plenty of blame to go around.  No matter who was President, this would have occurred when we withdrew.  The current plan to withdraw was actually negotiated by the Trump Administration. 

One of the problems in that the central government in Kabul was very corrupt.  For example we were paying most of the salaries of the Afghan soldiers.  Most of the Afghan officers were pocketing the money and not paying the soldiers.  There were many soldiers that had not been paid in months.

There are some members of my group who were veterans of the war in Afghanistan.  They felt that we could have won the war if we had not attacked Iraq.  We did not have the resources to fight both wars.  If a person is not going to believe this group of military historians and veterans, I seriously doubt that they will believe anything that little old me has to say.     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on August 19, 2021, 05:24:08 AM
Quote from: Florestan on August 19, 2021, 02:54:09 AM
The big question is: how on earth did the most formidable professional military force in history fail to destroy, during twenty full and long years, a gang of bearded, turbaned, sneaker-or-sandal-wearing guerillas armed with rifles or semi-automatic firearms?

Especially knowing how easy the Russiqns found it....amirite?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on August 19, 2021, 05:29:56 AM
Quote from: arpeggio on August 19, 2021, 05:22:46 AM
The United States lost the war in 2006.

Okay, but why? What went wrong?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on August 19, 2021, 05:35:28 AM
Quote from: arpeggio on August 19, 2021, 05:22:46 AM
I am a member of a military history group that has been discussing the situation.   A few of our members work at the pentagon and one is civilian instructor of strategy for the Marine Corps at Quantico. 

Although there is some disagreements the general consensus is:

The United States lost the war in 2006.  Instead of facing the reality the US spent fifteen years trying to turn things around.

There is plenty of blame to go around.  No matter who was President, this would have occurred when we withdrew.  The current plan to withdraw was actually negotiated by the Trump Administration. 

One of the problems in that the central government in Kabul was very corrupt.  For example we were paying most of the salaries of the Afghan soldiers.  Most of the Afghan officers were pocketing the money and not paying the soldiers.  There were many soldiers that had not been paid in months.

There are some members of my group who were veterans of the war in Afghanistan.  They felt that we could have won the war if we had not attacked Iraq.  We did not have the resources to fight both wars.  If a person is not going to believe this group of military historians and veterans, I seriously doubt that they will believe anything that little old me has to say.     
interesting to be sure. So many are blaming Biden but this goes further to the point that not much would have made a difference? I guess Biden can be faulted for painting a sunny picture previously.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on August 19, 2021, 05:52:23 AM
Quote from: Florestan on August 19, 2021, 02:54:09 AM
The big question is: how on earth did the most formidable professional military force in history fail to destroy, during twenty full and long years, a gang of bearded, turbaned, sneaker-or-sandal-wearing guerillas armed with rifles or semi-automatic firearms?

Only an echo of what the big question was in 1972.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on August 19, 2021, 06:58:16 PM
Quote from: Florestan on August 19, 2021, 02:54:09 AM
The big question is: how on earth did the most formidable professional military force in history fail to destroy, during twenty full and long years, a gang of bearded, turbaned, sneaker-or-sandal-wearing guerillas armed with rifles or semi-automatic firearms?

Because it would have required invading Pakistan.
I always felt that the invasion of Iraq was an abandonment of our effort in Afghanistan.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Que on August 20, 2021, 03:10:11 AM
Quote from: JBS on August 19, 2021, 06:58:16 PM
Because it would have required invading Pakistan.
I always felt that the invasion of Iraq was an abandonment of our effort in Afghanistan.

The security dangers posed by the regimes in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, have been the proverbial elephants in the room.

But shush... they are US allies....

The invasion and occupation of Iraq was strategically pointless, or rather: desastrous, wrong and illegal.

France and Germany were opposed to it, and got it right.
The US and the UK got it wrong in an epic way.

But of course the subsequent streams of refugees from Syria and Iraq were a perfect excuse for the UK to leave the EU...

Like in Danmark, in the Netherlands the unease with big neighbour Germany led to a postwar "transatlantic" (US/UK) orientation in security matters. But the desastrous aftermath of 9/11 has slowly led to the realisation that following the lead of the US and the UK in matters of international security isn't such a brilliant idea anymore.... ::)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on August 20, 2021, 03:20:18 AM
Invading Afghanistan was a huge mistake to begin with, and the rationale behind the withdrawal is sound --- but for a military superpower to withdraw after twenty years of occupation, leaving the field to the very enemy they went after in the first place and which is as strong as ever, is a humiliating debacle. I even wonder, if the USA weren't able to defeat the Taliban, what chance do they stand in a confrontation with China or even Russia (which God forbid!)...

And the way the withdrawal was planned and executed would be laughable and childish if it didn't triggered such a tragic humanitarian disaster.

I'm sorry to say it but with this blunder the USA government and military made fools of themselves and proved that America is a colossus with feet of clay. This is quite possibly the beginning of the end for the USA as a global superpower.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Que on August 20, 2021, 03:35:34 AM
Quote from: Florestan on August 20, 2021, 03:20:18 AM
This is quite possibly the beginning of the end for the USA as a global superpower.

The beginning?  ??? I believe 9/11 was 20 years ago....

Since then we've had the start of the war in Afghanistan, the invasion of Iraq, civil wars in Lybia and Syria, the Russian invasion in Georgia, the Ukrainian civil war and the Russian annexation of the Crimea, unbridled Chinese agression in the South China Sea. All examples in which the US is/was unable to respond and to deal with the situation in an adequate way.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on August 20, 2021, 03:37:52 AM
Quote from: Que on August 20, 2021, 03:35:34 AM
The beginning?  ??? I believe 9/11 was 20 years ago....

Since then we've had the start of the war in Afghanistan, the invasion of Iraq, civil wars in Lybia and Syria, the Russian invasion in Georgia, the Ukrainian civil war and the annexation of the Crimea, unbridled Chinese agression in the South China Sea. All examples in which the US is/was unable to respond and to deal with the situation in an adequate way.

I stand corrected.  :D

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on August 20, 2021, 03:40:47 AM
Some would disagree with the term Ukrainian Civil War, including me. Some leading separatists such as Girkin has acknowledged, that the violence was instigated by the invading groups from Russia and maintained by them too.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on August 20, 2021, 03:47:54 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on August 20, 2021, 03:40:47 AM
Some would disagree with the term Ukrainian Civil War, including me. Some leading separatists such as Girkin has acknowledged, that the violence was instigated by the invading groups from Russia and maintained by them too.

Good point.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on August 20, 2021, 03:50:26 AM
Quote from: Que on August 20, 2021, 03:35:34 AM
civil wars in Lybia and Syria, the Russian invasion in Georgia, the Ukrainian civil war and the Russian annexation of the Crimea[...] All examples in which the US is/was unable to respond and to deal with the situation in an adequate way.

Now that I think of it, so is/was the EU.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Que on August 20, 2021, 04:01:12 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on August 20, 2021, 03:40:47 AM
Some would disagree with the term Ukrainian Civil War, including me. Some leading separatists such as Girkin has acknowledged, that the violence was instigated by the invading groups from Russia and maintained by them too.

Fair point. No disagreement there.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Que on August 20, 2021, 04:04:20 AM
Quote from: Florestan on August 20, 2021, 03:50:26 AM
Now that I think of it, so is/was the EU.

If you take into consideration the EU's inherent inability to act in an unified way on the international geopolitical stage, that's a given...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on August 20, 2021, 06:49:31 AM
Quote from: Florestan on August 19, 2021, 05:29:56 AM
Okay, but why? What went wrong?
What I've heard is that the Afghan army was really terrible, there is an old video of them not even able to do jumping jacks. They were also heavily addicted to drugs.

And on top of that, Afghanistan isn't a country with a unifying story. That's what motivates people to fight for their country- ideals they believe in. There isn't any nationalistic pride like in the US, Germany, Japan, France, etc. Religion is a million times more important. So when things get tough, you can still bring your religion with you if you run away, but you can't bring your country- but so what, country is less important, anyways.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on August 20, 2021, 12:42:44 PM
Quote from: arpeggio on August 19, 2021, 05:22:46 AM

The United States lost the war in 2006.  Instead of facing the reality the US spent fifteen years trying to turn things around.
     

What war? The definition of the term has been diluted beyond recognition. Wasn't the goal of the ... whatever it was ... to deny a base of operations to terrorists who might threaten US interests in the States? Did that succeed? If so, wouldn't that a win?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on August 20, 2021, 09:12:05 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on August 20, 2021, 12:42:44 PM
What war? The definition of the term has been diluted beyond recognition. Wasn't the goal of the ... whatever it was ... to deny a base of operations to terrorists who might threaten US interests in the States? Did that succeed? If so, wouldn't that a win?

This is an example of why I find political discussions so frustrating.

I have read several veterans of the war state that we lost the war because we invaded Iraq and dropped the ball in Afghanistan.  If a person is not going to believe them I seriously doubt they will believe anything I say.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: The new erato on August 20, 2021, 10:16:01 PM
Quote from: Que on August 20, 2021, 03:10:11 AM
The security dangers posed by the regimes in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, have been the proverbial elephants in the room.

But shush... they are US allies....

The invasion and occupation of Iraq was strategically pointless, or rather: desastrous, wrong and illegal.

France and Germany were opposed to it, and got it right.
The US and the UK got it wrong in an epic way.

But of course the subsequent streams of refugees from Syria and Iraq were a perfect excuse for the UK to leave the EU...

I totally agree!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on August 21, 2021, 08:46:54 AM
Opinion: Merrick Garland must investigate Donald Trump's attempted coup — not for retribution but for deterrence

By Laurence H. Tribe Updated August 20, 2021, 2:49 p.m.

With increasing and troubling frequency, an argument is being made that former presidents should be presumptively shielded from criminal investigation and prosecution unless it is all but certain that a jury would return a conviction — a much higher bar than applies to anyone else. The argument amounts to a claim that — regardless of the nature of the crime — a former president should be above the law and beyond its reach. It's one thing to debate the case-by-case wisdom of prosecuting a sitting or former president. It's another to let that debate bring about the destruction of the very system — our constitutional democracy — that makes possible this, and every, public debate. Yet that's exactly what I fear might be taking place in what would be an unforgivable failure of nerve, a monumental failure of courage.

We may be witnessing a silent and ill-considered extension of the pernicious myth based not on our Constitution but on a mere memo the US Attorney General's Office of Legal Counsel released in 2000 which concludes that sitting presidents are immune from criminal prosecution.

I've previously questioned the correctness of that notion, but what is at stake if we implicitly extend presumptive immunity to those no longer holding public office is categorically different, far harder to defend, and far more dangerous.

We need to begin with the fundamental precept that not all crimes are created equal. Those crimes — regardless of who allegedly commits them — whose very aim is to overturn a fair election whereby our tradition of peaceful, lawful succession from one administration to the next takes place — a tradition begun by George Washington, continued by John Adams, and preserved by every president since except Donald Trump — are impossible to tolerate if we are to survive as a constitutional republic.

For nearly all of us, a solid factual basis to believe that one has committed a major federal crime — much less incited an insurrection against the government itself — would trigger serious criminal investigation, typically with a grand jury to ferret out all available evidence. So why the hesitation by the US attorney general to investigate and potentially prosecute when it comes to the former occupant of the Oval Office?

Political scientists tell us that criminalizing political differences is the mark of an immature legal system, a banana republic or a tyrannical, despotic regime. By criminalizing political differences, some say we run the risk of descending into an endless cycle of recrimination and revenge — and eventually armed conflict following complete loss of faith in the rule of law. To avoid such catastrophe, we should err on the side of letting bygones be bygones. At least for those at the highest levels of government.

Maybe so. But surely this rule cannot apply to a uniquely destabilizing and dangerous category of crimes, regardless of who allegedly perpetrates them: crimes directed at preventing the lawful transfer of political power through free and fair elections. To equate such crimes with more garden-variety offenses, financial or otherwise, is to make a monumental category error. Crimes in this special category strike at the very heart of what Abraham Lincoln called "government of the people, by the people, for the people." They differ intrinsically from crimes in which the risks of appearing to engage in politically motivated prosecution might at times outweigh the necessity of opening a formal investigation into a former officeholder.

Part of the thinking behind the reluctance to prosecute former presidents has been the rarely articulated but omnipresent worry that a president who has committed crimes and expects his successor in office to prosecute them will have an especially powerful motive to resort to corrupt and unscrupulous means to cling to power. There was talk in Trump's own case, for example, that his desperate drive to defeat Joe Biden at all costs — which led him to extort Ukraine to feign an investigation into Biden's family and thus led to the first bipartisan impeachment in American history — was in no small part born of Trump's obsessive fear that a Biden administration might prosecute him for his many alleged financial crimes.

But that very rationale demonstrates the utter irrationality of failing to prosecute those particular misdeeds that manifest not merely greed or other common character flaws but a criminal refusal to abide by the rule of law with respect to leaving office peacefully, once duly defeated at the ballot box or constitutionally term-limited.

Any president or attorney general who failed to pursue with unrelenting zeal the mission of uncovering and holding perpetrators accountable for crimes fitting within that category, perhaps guided by a tradition of giving past presidents in particular an implicit pass, would not only be derelict in their duty to defend the rule of law, but would be lethally endangering the very survival of the American experiment in self-government.

We cannot know for sure, given the way federal criminal investigations are typically shrouded in secrecy, but it could well be that Attorney General Merrick Garland is approaching the possible prosecution of the former president in this hesitant way, especially in light of how much else — from legal issues spawned by the coronavirus pandemic to immigration controversies arising from the tragedy in Afghanistan — bedevils him and the entire administration today. My conclusion: Despite all this, the attorney general should not treat the task of holding those who tried to engineer a coup as anything less than Job One.

In a recent opinion piece in The Washington Post, two former US attorneys and I laid out a roadmap to the criminal investigation we believe must be undertaken — if it hasn't already been — with respect to every private citizen or public official, whether in Congress or the executive branch, who may have played a role.

No tradition of forbearance can properly shield what tyrants and despots regularly do: invent "votes" to convert defeat into victory, or hold onto office by fabricating claims of corruption after losing in a free and fair election. In the case of Trump, we have all been witness to what looks very much like a veritable "sore loser" crime spree that included pressuring his own Justice Department to "just say the election was corrupt" and let him and his friends in Congress do the rest; insisting that the Georgia secretary of state "just find" the 11,780 votes he needed to put that state's 13 electoral votes in his column; inciting and giving aid and comfort to the first insurrection against our government fomented by its head; and perhaps engaging in seditious conspiracy.

Trump is not our first president credibly alleged to have committed serious crimes while in office. But even president Richard Nixon's worst obstructions of justice did not approach the ultimate high crime of seeking to bring down the entire democratic system by which we choose our leaders every four years. When President Gerald Ford pardoned his disgraced predecessor, perhaps lighting the path for Trump to follow, at least he was not foreclosing accountability for an effort to overturn an election or cling to power after defeat. Nor was he encouraging Nixon, too politically humiliated and discredited to run again, to try repeating his abuses of power. In contrast, Trump's apparent crimes, which he and his supporters openly insist were patriotic acts that they would gladly repeat, have the potential to leave him in power indefinitely. The only antidote is vigorous investigation and prosecution, not for purposes of retribution but for purposes of deterrence.

This risk to be averted — of an executive using corrupt or violent means to seize and hold office — was our republic's first and animating fear. Rebels from a hereditary monarchy, the framers of our Constitution worried about a chief executive who might use the powers of the office to convert the limited term granted by the voters into a permanent appointment secured only by abusing the powers granted. Indeed, these fears nearly derailed the ratification of the Constitution itself, and led to several compromises and mechanisms — such as the impeachment power — aimed at holding the chief executive within constitutional bounds.

Trump's relentlessness has laid bare the defects in many of those accountability mechanisms. Now Garland stands as the final line of defense for our constitutional democracy. No prior attorney general has confronted so daunting a challenge. For what might be the first time in his life and what will surely be the last, Garland could hold the future of the last best hope on earth in his hands.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on August 21, 2021, 09:20:42 AM
WaPo Ed. Bd:  "In the past year — despite a pandemic, protests over police shootings and a push for change — 943 people have been shot and killed by police. As The Post's Mark Berman, Julie Tate and Jennifer Jenkins reported, that brings to more than 6,400 the total number of victims of police shootings since this newspaper launched its database a year after the 2014 shooting of a Black teenager in Ferguson, Mo. A Post investigation then found that the FBI undercounted fatal police shootings by more than half because the reporting by police departments is voluntary and many departments fail to do so."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on August 21, 2021, 10:41:50 AM
Audiatur et altera pars*

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/tucker-carlson-biden-officials-turning-more-than-afghanistan (https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/tucker-carlson-biden-officials-turning-more-than-afghanistan)


* Caveat: a dead, white, European, men, slave-holder dictum.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on August 22, 2021, 10:50:12 AM
And, in Trump World, where the cruelty is the point:

In Florida, DeSantis cut jobless aid just as virus began terrifying new wave
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on August 22, 2021, 10:59:26 AM
Former Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman admits faulty assumptions on effectively training Afghan forces

By Matt Viser 12:10 p.m.

Mike Mullen, who served as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under President Barack Obama, said he made faulty assumptions that the United States could train Afghan forces and build an effective, modern army. He said that he was wrong in those assumptions and now has regrets.

"What I thought we could do, and I advised President Obama accordingly, is I thought we could turn it around," he said Sunday. "Obviously I was wrong."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on August 22, 2021, 01:47:13 PM
Jennifer Rubin:

In rebutting unwarranted criticism that the United States was abandoning Afghans we promised to help, Biden pointed to the 13,000 people who had been evacuated from Afghanistan since Aug. 14. By Saturday, the number was up to roughly 17,000 (22,000 since late July). Now for the hard part: Figuring out the total population that still wants evacuation, and overcoming the obvious logistical problems in transporting them to the airport with the Taliban controlling Kabul.

Second, Biden, in response to accusations of incompetence, was able to explain his reading of intelligence reports. Without blaming others  [there's a significant change from Blowhard-a-Lago—kh] for the suddenness of the Taliban victory, he declared, "I made the decision. The buck stops with me. I took the consensus opinion. The consensus opinion was that, in fact, it would not occur, if it occurred, until later in the year. So, it was my decision." He also gently informed the media that if we had left 15 or five years ago, "there's no way in which you'd be able to leave Afghanistan without there being some of what you're seeing now." Nevertheless, he was able to add that "we've been able to get a large number of Americans out, all our personnel at the embassy out, and so on." In essence, it was always going to be hard, Biden asserted, and we are now doing what needs to be done to live up to our commitments.

Third, Biden went to great lengths to rebut the accusation that allies were dismayed, if not furious, about the United States' pullout. Certainly, loud voices of disapproval popped up around the globe. (The United States is not the only democracy with grandstanding backbenchers who crave attention.) But when it came to the official actions of our allies, Biden highlighted European and other partners operating as they should in trying circumstances....
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on August 23, 2021, 08:03:51 AM
I fully agree with the USA's abandonment of Afghanistan -- yes, it IS an abandonment and so be it.
I don't hold the USA mainly accountable for the current state of affairs.  In fact after it was clear that the Obama's surge had not crushed the Taliban in 2010 and Hamid Karzai be criticizing the allied actions that country, I began to feel that Afghans should be left to their own devices.

Two things were then clear, circa 2010:
So even 'way back then I was thinking , Eff 'em.

The fact that the Taliban triumph has come quicker than the US military and Afghan government predicted is neither here nor there -- it was going to happen and it was 95% the fault of the Afghans themselves.

Sure, the USA could have kept a fairly modest contingent in Afghanistan and staved off the Taliban indefinitely but as far as anyone could tell, that would have been forever.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on August 23, 2021, 08:28:09 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on August 23, 2021, 08:03:51 AM
I fully agree with the USA's abandonment of Afghanistan -- yes, it IS an abandonment and so be it.
I don't hold the USA mainly accountable for the current state of affairs.  In fact after it was clear that the Obama's surge had not crushed the Taliban in 2010 and Hamid Karzai be criticizing the allied actions that country, I began to feel that Afghans should be left to their own devices.

Two things were then clear, circa 2010:

  • No outsiders, not matter how well intended, can "build a nation";  that must be done by the people of the aspiring nation;
  • In the case of Afghanistan, there wasn't the internal unity and civic determination to overcome tribal differences and thereby the Taliban.
So even 'way back then I was thinking , Eff 'em.

The fact that the Taliban triumph has come quicker than the US military and Afghan government predicted is neither here nor there -- it was going to happen and it was 95% the fault of the Afghans themselves.

Sure, the USA could have kept a fairly modest contingent in Afghanistan and staved off the Taliban indefinitely but as far as anyone could tell, that would have been forever.

I find your analysis sound.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on August 23, 2021, 08:35:24 AM
It should be pointed out that the "failure of intelligence" was merely thinking the Afghan army would not immediately run away from/surrender to/switch over to the opponent.  Everyone knew what happened would happen. But they thought the process would be slow enough to allow the NATO powers time to evacuate whomever they wanted to evacuate, and not deal with mobs of Afghans who needed to take immediate refuge with the US military.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on August 23, 2021, 08:36:30 AM
Quote from: JBS on August 23, 2021, 08:35:24 AM
It should be pointed out that the "failure of intelligence" was merely thinking the Afghan army would not immediately run away from/surrender to/switch over to the opponent.  Everyone knew what happened would happen. But they thought the process would be slow enough to allow the NATO powers time to evacuate whomever they wanted to evacuate, and not deal with mobs of Afghans who needed to take immediate refuge with the US military.

Aye.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on August 23, 2021, 12:05:27 PM
Apparently there is good cooperation between western countries evacuating their people from Afganistan Talibanistan.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on August 23, 2021, 12:49:52 PM
Quote from: Florestan on August 21, 2021, 10:41:50 AM
Audiatur et altera pars*

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/tucker-carlson-biden-officials-turning-more-than-afghanistan (https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/tucker-carlson-biden-officials-turning-more-than-afghanistan)


* Caveat: a dead, white, European, men, slave-holder dictum.

Yes, because America's Julius Streicher must be heard.

https://www.rawstory.com/there-is-a-sinister-strategy-behind-tucker-carlsons-apparent-stupidity/
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on August 23, 2021, 12:58:59 PM
Quote from: Daverz on August 23, 2021, 12:49:52 PM
Yes, because America's Julius Streicher must be heard.

https://www.rawstory.com/there-is-a-sinister-strategy-behind-tucker-carlsons-apparent-stupidity/

I'd say the article underestimates the gullibility of Carlson's audience. They believe those things because they want it to be true, and all contrary information is dismissed as something produced by the "lamestream media".
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on August 23, 2021, 01:04:14 PM
Quote from: JBS on August 23, 2021, 12:58:59 PM
I'd say the article underestimates the gullibility of Carlson's audience. They believe those things because they want it to be true, and all contrary information is dismissed as something produced by the "lamestream media".

That's the Trumpworld ecosystem
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on August 24, 2021, 12:49:29 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on August 23, 2021, 08:03:51 AM
I fully agree with the USA's abandonment of Afghanistan -- yes, it IS an abandonment and so be it.
I don't hold the USA mainly accountable for the current state of affairs.  In fact after it was clear that the Obama's surge had not crushed the Taliban in 2010 and Hamid Karzai be criticizing the allied actions that country, I began to feel that Afghans should be left to their own devices.

Two things were then clear, circa 2010:

  • No outsiders, not matter how well intended, can "build a nation";  that must be done by the people of the aspiring nation;
  • In the case of Afghanistan, there wasn't the internal unity and civic determination, despite allied assistance, to overcome tribal differences and thereby the Taliban.
So even 'way back then I was thinking , Eff 'em.

The fact that the Taliban triumph has come quicker than the US military and Afghan government predicted is neither here nor there -- it was going to happen and it was 95% the fault of the Afghans themselves.

Sure, the USA could have kept a fairly modest contingent in Afghanistan and staved off the Taliban indefinitely but as far as anyone could tell, that would have been forever.
I agree too except I think the U.S. has got to take more blame and do more soul-searching. Why were we there really? How about all the money people were making there? If the reasons were venal then that's on U.S. leadership.
I AM DISGUSTED BEYONG BELIEF BY THE LIKES OF LINDSAY GRAHAM, THE MEDIA, NEOCONS, ETC. They wanted this war. IT'S DISGUSTING HOW THEY WANT TO BLAME SOMEONE ELSE.
And sorry, I give plus points to Biden because everyone in the establishment wanted him to go back on this deal and postpone it. Sticking to it was brave. Maybe it's the only policy opinion he's been right about in his career.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on August 24, 2021, 03:04:23 AM
Quote from: milk on August 24, 2021, 12:49:29 AM

I agree too except I think the U.S. has got to take more blame and do more soul-searching. Why were we there really? How about all the money people were making there? If the reasons were venal then that's on U.S. leadership.
I AM DISGUSTED BEYONG BELIEF BY THE LIKES OF LINDSAY GRAHAM, THE MEDIA, NEOCONS, ETC. They wanted this war. IT'S DISGUSTING HOW THEY WANT TO BLAME SOMEONE ELSE.
And sorry, I give plus points to Biden because everyone in the establishment wanted him to go back on this deal and postpone it. Sticking to it was brave. Maybe it's the only policy opinion he's been right about in his career.

There is conjecture that the USA could have cut a deal with Taliban in 2001 to get Al-Qaeda out of the country.  I don't know whether this is true, but if so that is the approach that ought to have been pursued.  As it stands, I approved the Afghan invasion back in '01 on the basis that the Taliban was supporting that terrorist organization.  (I want to mention that I was against the Iraq invasion despite swallowing the WMD deception).

In fact the invasion by the USA and allies suppressed the Taliban, more or less, for 20 years bring about greater freedom for women and other Afghans.  However this "nation building" failed largely because Afghans could not step up to take advantage of foreign assistance.  IMHO, there was never much chance of this "nation building" was going to working.  If it had worked, it would have been vindicated, however it was evident to me that it was failing a decade ago.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on August 24, 2021, 06:47:45 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on August 23, 2021, 08:03:51 AM
I fully agree with the USA's abandonment of Afghanistan -- yes, it IS an abandonment and so be it.
I don't hold the USA mainly accountable for the current state of affairs.  In fact after it was clear that the Obama's surge had not crushed the Taliban in 2010 and Hamid Karzai be criticizing the allied actions that country, I began to feel that Afghans should be left to their own devices.

Two things were then clear, circa 2010:

  • No outsiders, not matter how well intended, can "build a nation";  that must be done by the people of the aspiring nation;
  • In the case of Afghanistan, there wasn't the internal unity and civic determination, despite allied assistance, to overcome tribal differences and thereby the Taliban.
So even 'way back then I was thinking , Eff 'em.

The fact that the Taliban triumph has come quicker than the US military and Afghan government predicted is neither here nor there -- it was going to happen and it was 95% the fault of the Afghans themselves.

Sure, the USA could have kept a fairly modest contingent in Afghanistan and staved off the Taliban indefinitely but as far as anyone could tell, that would have been forever.

I mostly agree but have a few thoughts to add:

Biden, following Trump's example of reneging on the Iran-nuclear deal, could have disavowed his predecessor's withdrawal agreement and extended the half-assed semi-occupation, but his concern with national credibility among our allies argued against it. Those kind of agreements have to be stable across administrations or no one will take them seriously. And it's questionable how much the extra time would have helped. The Trump administration had spent four years crippling the Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) program, creating the enormous backlog of Afghans in the pipeline who are now likely being hunted down and summarily executed for working with US forces. What Biden could and should have done was to start the emergency evacuations months in advance, setting aside the SIV red tape. His failure to do so was a blunder and the result is the ongoing shameful abandonment of our allies.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: krummholz on August 24, 2021, 07:19:37 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on August 24, 2021, 06:47:45 AM
I mostly agree but have a few thoughts to add:

Biden, following Trump's example of reneging on the Iran-nuclear deal, could have disavowed his predecessor's withdrawal agreement and extended the half-assed semi-occupation, but his concern with national credibility among our allies argued against it. Those kind of agreements have to be stable across administrations or no one will take them seriously. And it's questionable how much the extra time would have helped. The Trump administration had spent four years crippling the Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) program, creating the enormous backlog of Afghans in the pipeline who are now likely being hunted down and summarily executed for working with US forces. What Biden could and should have done was to start the emergency evacuations months in advance, setting aside the SIV red tape. His failure to do so was a blunder and the result is the ongoing shameful abandonment of our allies.

I agree with both you and Fëanor - but where did Biden cite concern for national credibility as a reason for not reneging on the withdrawal? The only publicly stated reason that I recall was that it would have put a target on the backs of American troops, a reason that plays well at home and is, of course, very much in keeping with Biden's moral character, but IMO projects weakness to the rest of the world.

Of course, by NOT getting the Afghans in the pipeline (assuming he is not able to, which remains to be seen but looks very doubtful), he has damaged the US's national credibility far more than he would have by going back on the deal. After all, it's not as if the Talibs themselves were being faithful to it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on August 25, 2021, 11:44:57 AM
Quote from: krummholz on August 24, 2021, 07:19:37 AM
I agree with both you and Fëanor - but where did Biden cite concern for national credibility as a reason for not reneging on the withdrawal? The only publicly stated reason that I recall was that it would have put a target on the backs of American troops, a reason that plays well at home and is, of course, very much in keeping with Biden's moral character, but IMO projects weakness to the rest of the world.

Of course, by NOT getting the Afghans in the pipeline (assuming he is not able to, which remains to be seen but looks very doubtful), he has damaged the US's national credibility far more than he would have by going back on the deal. After all, it's not as if the Talibs themselves were being faithful to it.

He didn't specifically cite it, but the lesson from the Trump administration's withdrawal from the Iran-nuclear deal, the Paris-climate accord, and so on foregrounded the issue and provided object lessons in why the continuity of US foreign policy has to be taken seriously. But you are right: While I think Biden is concerned about policy continuity in the abstract, it certainly wasn't on the top of the list of his motivations in this case.

More generally, it looks like Biden et alia were naive about the levels of corruption in the puppet government and its consequences for the motivation of Afghan national troops. It has been suggested that the capitulation of forces in and about the provincial capitols had been negotiated in advance between the Taliban, local government officials, and national forces. This seems likely in retrospect, and if it was so, then the intelligence failure on the Biden administration's part is appalling.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on August 25, 2021, 11:54:54 AM
Quote from: Daverz on August 23, 2021, 12:49:52 PM
Yes, because America's Julius Streicher must be heard.

https://www.rawstory.com/there-is-a-sinister-strategy-behind-tucker-carlsons-apparent-stupidity/

Iow, Tucker Carlson (whom until having read the article I quoted I knew only by name --- and read it because quoted in full on a Romanian website) is a despicable Nazi propagandist, inciting, and approving of, extreme hatred against Jews and worthy of being hanged by the neck for his crimes against humanity...

What balderdash you are capable of writing!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on August 25, 2021, 01:16:01 PM
Quote from: Florestan on August 25, 2021, 11:54:54 AM
Iow, Tucker Carlson (whom until having read the article I quoted I knew only by name --- and read it because quoted in full on a Romanian website) is a despicable Nazi propagandist, inciting, and approving of, extreme hatred against Jews and worthy of being hanged by the neck for his crimes against humanity...

What balderdash you are capable of writing!

Don't be so literal.  You've got it mostly right, though.  Tucker Carlson is a despicable propagandist, inciting, and approving of, hatred against immigrants and racial minorities (do we need it to be "extreme" to find it despicable?).  He's constantly race-baiting on his show.

He has also promoted the anti-Semitic "Great Replacement" conspiracy theory on his show. 

https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/09/media/adl-letter-fox-news-tucker-carlson/index.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/tucker-carlson/2021/07/13/398fa720-dd9f-11eb-a501-0e69b5d012e5_story.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/04/12/how-tucker-carlsons-racist-rhetoric-gives-new-life-trumpism/
https://www.wgbh.org/news/commentary/2021/04/15/tucker-carlson-is-a-white-supremacist-and-hes-giving-fox-viewers-exactly-what-they-want


Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on August 25, 2021, 01:55:48 PM
And lets not forget he's one of the most aggressive and influential pushers of covid disinformation and vaccine skepticism no matter how far out, including most recently:

Right-wing media pushes animal dewormer as COVID treatment
The FDA: "You are not a horse. You are not a cow." (https://www.mercurynews.com/2021/08/23/right-wing-media-pushes-animal-dewormer-as-covid-treatment/)


But apart from that he's a totally serious "conservative voice" who needs to be heard for "balance"

(https://assets.rbl.ms/24709964/origin.png)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on August 25, 2021, 03:04:10 PM
Quote from: Daverz on August 23, 2021, 12:49:52 PM
Yes, because America's Julius Streicher must be heard.

https://www.rawstory.com/there-is-a-sinister-strategy-behind-tucker-carlsons-apparent-stupidity/

Excellent article, thanks
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on August 25, 2021, 05:55:26 PM
https://apnews.com/article/michigan-gretchen-whitmer-grand-rapids-c502551bd6fa4af0a8706d0b9653e653

How much time would a Black plotter have gotten?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on August 26, 2021, 07:50:58 AM
Quote from: Daverz on August 25, 2021, 01:16:01 PM
Don't be so literal.  You've got it mostly right, though.  Tucker Carlson is a despicable propagandist, inciting, and approving of, hatred against immigrants and racial minorities (do we need it to be "extreme" to find it despicable?).  He's constantly race-baiting on his show.

He has also promoted the anti-Semitic "Great Replacement" conspiracy theory on his show. 

https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/09/media/adl-letter-fox-news-tucker-carlson/index.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/tucker-carlson/2021/07/13/398fa720-dd9f-11eb-a501-0e69b5d012e5_story.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/04/12/how-tucker-carlsons-racist-rhetoric-gives-new-life-trumpism/
https://www.wgbh.org/news/commentary/2021/04/15/tucker-carlson-is-a-white-supremacist-and-hes-giving-fox-viewers-exactly-what-they-want
Do you have direct links to the specific source or just links from the opposition?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on August 26, 2021, 09:43:56 AM
Lordy, There May Be Consequences

Judge hammers Trump election lawyers (https://morningshots.thebulwark.com/p/lordy-there-may-be-consequences)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on August 26, 2021, 09:53:55 AM
The dark future of far-right Trumpist politics is coming into view

Greg Sargent Today at 11:18 a.m. EDT

The anti-immigrant politics of a certain swath of Republican politicians and Donald Trump loyalists have taken a particularly virulent and ugly turn of late — and if you look closely, you can catch a glimpse of the future direction that U.S. far-right Trumpist political aspirations might take.

This unsettling hint of what's to come emerges, surprisingly, from the confluence of two big developments in our politics that aren't linked in any obvious sense: the surge in covid-19 cases, and the battle over the coming resettlement of Afghan refugees in the United States.

Right now, the Republican Party is deeply split over the refugees created by the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, as a new report from the New York Times details. While some Republicans recognize an obligation to admit them here, as many worked alongside the United States, many are aligning with Trump and demagoguing them in the most despicable terms imaginable.

Meanwhile, with covid cases on the rise, GOP governors in states seeing the worst outbreaks are escalating efforts to blame this on migrants who, fleeing their own horrors, are attempting to cross our southern border. The right-wing media disinformation apparatus has pushed this message with lockstep unity and unfathomably disgusting vitriol.

These two developments together bode ill for what's to come. They suggest that U.S. reactionary right-wing movements may be characterized by a very particular form of rising nativist and ethnonationalist cruelty at exactly the time when increasingly pressing global challenges will require a diametrically different approach.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on August 26, 2021, 09:57:39 AM
Capitol Cops Sue Trump, Associates in Sweeping Jan. 6 Civil Suit

Cheyenne R. Ubiera
Published Aug. 26, 2021 1:47PM ET

A group of Capitol Police officers have sued former President Donald Trump and some of his associates in a sweeping civil suit that alleges he worked together with far-right activists and extremists to promote the election lies that underpinned the Jan. 6 insurrection. Associates like Roger Stone Jr. and groups like the Proud Boys are among the defendants. "This is probably the most comprehensive account of Jan. 6 in terms of civil cases," said Edward Casper, the lawyer leading the suit, which alleges that Trump and the other defendants violated the Ku Klux Klan Act by interfering with Congress' constitutional duties.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on August 26, 2021, 10:56:23 AM
A few months ago I made the observation that the Trump Administration has messed up the United States Postal Service.  I made the comment that the time it took to deliver a letter got longer.

I recall how a few Trumpsters chastised me.

Well I have just had another example of how the postal service has deteriorated under Trump minions.  I normally pay most of my bills through the mail (I will not respond to why am I doing it the old fashion way.  If a person want to pay his bills through the mail he should be being subjected to a bogus lecture.  I have my reasons.)  Since January two of my checks to the charge vendor (Visa) have been lost and I was stuck with steep late charges.  This is the first time this has happened to me in decades.  And now twice within a few months.  So far Visa has reversed the charges.  They told me after the last incident they would no longer acknowledge any lost payments.  I am now forced to pay off my charge bills online and I SHOULD NOT BE FORCED TO DO SO.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on August 26, 2021, 02:46:54 PM
Quote from: Florestan on August 26, 2021, 09:11:46 AM
Had the current, colossal, tragic Afghanistan debacle occurred during Trump's presidency, you guys would have flayed him alive verbally --- and rightly so.

Now that it happened under Biden's presidency, you are silent about it and instead flay alive verbally his critics.

Liberal fair-mindedness in action...  ;D
Lol yep, tribalism in action.
I don't know any groups of Trump supporters, but I would bet money they would do the exact same thing.
You might as well call partisan politics "tribal politics."
You notice how Fox News complained about Obama's golf trips while CNN complains about Trump's golf trips? And the ardent followers of each network parrots that criticism, but don't complain when THEIR president is doing it.

Seems like if so much of humanity has such a tribalistic orientation, that energy could be used in different places, like team sports or something, anything that is more good natured fun and doesn't result in such conflict.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on August 26, 2021, 03:12:34 PM
Quote from: arpeggio on August 26, 2021, 10:56:23 AM
A few months ago I made the observation that the Trump Administration has messed up the United States Postal Service.  I made the comment that the time it took to deliver a letter got longer.

You're needlessly politicizing a crisis that has been brewing for the past twenty years.  The USPS have been making critical changes to how they operate since the Obama administration.  They've been operating at a loss for many years.  It is a necessary service so that people can get prescriptions through the mail, but anything else will be slowed or cut.  And I expect this to continue through the Biden administration.

The world has moved on.  People don't write letters, or pay bills, or collect and sign paperwork through the mail.  They don't request and order through catalogs.  People don't even use netflix dvds anymore.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on August 26, 2021, 04:37:02 PM
Lame duck time has started now.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on August 26, 2021, 05:26:37 PM
Quote from: Herman on August 26, 2021, 04:37:02 PM
Lame duck time has started now.

Only if you take media focus as a valid measurement of public opinion.  What the public feels now, and what it will feel in the long term, can't be accurately co-related to the number of hawks appearing on the pundit shows.

Remember 2 things: a lot of the media and political class have invested heavily into the GWOT narrative for 20 years, and if the media has no real controversy to report on, it must either invent one or lose the public's attention.

I saw several Twitter accounts today complaining that Biden was not making the forceful response he had promised 5 days ago if the evacuation operation was attacked. Checking the time stamps, I noticed these people were making their complaints within an hour or two of the initial reports of the attack.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: The new erato on August 26, 2021, 06:59:16 PM
Prescriptions through the mail? Holy moly. If I have a prescription from any doctor , any pharmacist in Norway pulls up its online status and updates the status after delivering the required medication.

If I'm due for a NHS compensation after payment that is also handled automatically.

Renewal of current prescriptions is handled online. I request a renewal from my doctor (online of course usong a secure national ID system), and after reviewing my case I get an online feedback and the database is updated with a renewal.

Very smooth, and incredibly practical when e.g. travelling if you've forgotten some medication.

Of course my vaccinations and Corona test status is also available online and can be checked by a QR code I can download to my Phone or print out.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on August 26, 2021, 07:57:03 PM
Quote from: DavidW on August 26, 2021, 03:12:34 PM
You're needlessly politicizing a crisis that has been brewing for the past twenty years.  The USPS have been making critical changes to how they operate since the Obama administration.  They've been operating at a loss for many years.  It is a necessary service so that people can get prescriptions through the mail, but anything else will be slowed or cut.  And I expect this to continue through the Biden administration.

The world has moved on.  People don't write letters, or pay bills, or collect and sign paperwork through the mail.  They don't request and order through catalogs.  People don't even use netflix dvds anymore.

I am not going to debate you on this.  I am not going to waste my time trying to defend my reasons since you will shoot down whatever I have to say.  I said my peace and you can have the last word.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: The new erato on August 26, 2021, 08:09:04 PM
Quote from: arpeggio on August 26, 2021, 07:57:03 PM
I am not going to debate you on this.  I am not going to waste my time trying to defend my reasons since you will shoot down whatever I have to say.  I said my peace and you can have the last word.
Not going to question your choices.

99% of my bills comes up in my Netbank, where I can read them as pdfs, change the payment date or the account they should be paid by, and approve them for payment using secure ID (usually by a digital certificate on my phone or PC). The same as used for the health service.

I get an email and SMS notification on their arirval.

The postal service seems more and more irrelevant. Small packages that fit in the mailbox are the prime business, larger packages are notified, mainly by online service, and collected.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on August 26, 2021, 08:16:36 PM
Quote from: arpeggio on August 26, 2021, 07:57:03 PM
I am not going to debate you on this.  I am not going to waste my time trying to defend my reasons since you will shoot down whatever I have to say.  I said my peace and you can have the last word.

That the USPS has become increasingly obsolete over the last 20 years and that Trump's nominee made things worse are not mutually exclusive.

I pay some bills online but not many. The less I do online the less I need to worry about online security at both my end and the payee's.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on August 27, 2021, 03:32:02 AM
Quote from: JBS on August 26, 2021, 05:26:37 PM
Only if you take media focus as a valid measurement of public opinion.  What the public feels now, and what it will feel in the long term, can't be accurately co-related to the number of hawks appearing on the pundit shows.

Remember 2 things: a lot of the media and political class have invested heavily into the GWOT narrative for 20 years, and if the media has no real controversy to report on, it must either invent one or lose the public's attention.


Apart from media bloviating there are just the very bad images of the scenes at the airport and now the hard numbers of dead, too.

Those are not going to go away and there will be no second term.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on August 27, 2021, 03:34:01 AM
Quote from: Florestan on August 26, 2021, 09:11:46 AM
Had the current, colossal, tragic Afghanistan debacle occurred during Trump's presidency, you guys would have flayed him alive verbally --- and rightly so.

Now that it happened under Biden's presidency, you are silent about it and instead flay alive verbally his critics.

Liberal fair-mindedness in action...  ;D
I think that's right. But I don't think Trump would have deserved it because I think getting out was always going to be a mess. I'm firmly anti-Trump but I understand why people like Glenn Greenwald say Bush and Obama were worse in terms of foreign policy. To me, this sticking to this plan was courageous on the part of Biden.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on August 27, 2021, 03:35:42 AM
Quote from: Herman on August 27, 2021, 03:32:02 AM
Apart from media bloviating there are just the very bad images of the scenes at the airport and now the hard numbers of dead, too.

Those are not going to go away and there will be no second term.
Neocons are just despicable hypocrites. THEY made this war and now they'll turn around with the lie that someone also has bungled it. The whole thing was a bungle.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: The new erato on August 27, 2021, 04:12:06 AM
The laughing stock thing starte years ago. And getting out of Afghanistan would always become a mess. I'm with Milk here.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on August 27, 2021, 05:08:51 AM
Quote from: Florestan on August 27, 2021, 04:00:15 AM
Which plan? The whole thing looks rather like a retreat in disarray than a carefully planned withdrawal.

No, really, the USA is now the laughing stock of the world, but then again what could you expect when the commander-in-chief and allegedly the most powerful man on earth is this guy?

(https://a57.foxnews.com/static.foxnews.com/foxnews.com/content/uploads/2021/08/1200/675/429a466e-image-1.png?ve=1&tl=1)
I don't think so. It's called losing. Did you want a plan as good as the one we've had for the last twenty years? If that one didn't work, what makes you think anything else would? This is what I expect when The American military withdraws. Chaos. What did you want to fill the vacuum?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on August 27, 2021, 05:10:38 AM
Quote from: Florestan on August 27, 2021, 04:34:18 AM
Most probably there will not even be a complete first term.
This is a mirror of what we said about trump. He made it for four years though and only barely lost. I'll say this, if the nominees is Kamala then I agree. She's a loser.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on August 27, 2021, 05:40:47 AM
Who Takes the Blame?

People are pointing fingers in all directions over President Biden's unfolding foreign-policy crisis.

By Peter Nicholas

Who, exactly, is responsible for today's calamity in Afghanistan? ISIS appears to be the author of this tragedy, but are American officials at fault as well? At least 12 U.S. service members and dozens of Afghan civilians are dead after attacks by a pair of suicide bombers just outside the Kabul airport. The number of casualties is sure to rise.

For that matter, who will Americans blame when they think about the image of desperate Afghans clinging to a departing C-17? Even before the bombings in Kabul, the U.S. evacuation of Afghanistan had been intermittently chaotic—some of those lucky enough to escape were transferred to rat- and feces-infested holding facilities in Qatar. A lost war is ending much as it began 20 years ago, with a gruesome terrorist attack targeting Americans.

Prior to today's attacks, Congress had already opened hearings into the Biden administration's handling of the Afghanistan pullout, though Washington has its own ideas of who was culpable. A recent Politico story distilled the city's insistence on finding and shaming a scapegoat in its headline "The Blob Turns on Jake"—a reference to the foreign-policy establishment's current view of Biden's national security adviser, Jake Sullivan. Representative Dan Crenshaw of Texas, a Republican and ex–Navy Seal who lost his right eye in an explosion while serving in Afghanistan, singled out Secretary of State Antony Blinken earlier this week. At a private briefing with lawmakers Blinken said the U.S. expected to extract all Americans from Afghanistan by President Joe Biden's August 31 deadline, Crenshaw told me. "I don't like the way the secretary of state toed the line for Biden," he said. "No sane person believes that."

Others are looking outside the White House. When I spoke with Representative Adam Schiff of California on Tuesday, he pointed to the Pentagon. "With all the contingency planning that the Pentagon does, it seems inexplicable that we didn't have a better plan for how this ends," Schiff, the chair of the House Intelligence Committee, told me. Then there are those blaming the intelligence community, specifically whoever drew the erroneous conclusion that the Afghan military could keep the Taliban at bay for months. "If I were in his [Biden's] shoes, I would examine all the folks dealing with this intelligence—I'd be pretty pissed off," Representative Bill Pascrell of New Jersey told me.

Today's casualties also cast doubt on a core claim that Biden has used to justify the troop pullout—that even without a military presence in Afghanistan, the U.S. can still stave off terrorist attacks. General Kenneth McKenzie of U.S. Central Command said in a briefing today that the airlift from Kabul would continue, despite the threat of terrorist attacks ahead of the August 31 withdrawal date. As of this writing, about 1,000 Americans are still in Afghanistan. Biden has pledged to leave none behind. If anyone remains stranded, Biden's unfulfilled promise may haunt his presidency for the rest of the term, while providing propaganda fodder for terrorists.

No top-level administration firings appear imminent. A high-profile housecleaning ordered by Biden would amount to a profound admission of error that Republicans would eagerly exploit in next year's midterms and in the 2024 presidential election. For now, the White House remains focused on evacuating Americans and the Afghan interpreters, aid workers, and soldiers who helped the U.S. in the war effort. Rather than firing people in the near term, the administration is preparing to bring in more staff to help resettle the Afghans who've fled the country, a person familiar with the planning told me.

Biden's decision to withdraw from Afghanistan is one that a large majority of Americans favor, and have for years. It's something he's long wanted to do. In 2009, he spoke privately to Barack Obama about the then-president's plans to temporarily add 30,000 troops to the U.S. forces in Afghanistan. As he walked with Obama from the White House residence into the Oval Office, Biden tried to dissuade the president from a "surge" that proved to be a futile attempt to beat back the Taliban. Warning Obama about the advice coming from the military, Biden said: "If you let them roll you, you'll be their puppy for the next four years," according to a person familiar with the conversation. "Joe, I'd like to see you be president for five minutes to see how you'd do it," this person said was Obama's reply.

"Biden is a stubborn guy," one former Obama-administration foreign-policy official told me, speaking on condition of anonymity to talk more freely. "Sometimes he does not want to hear what he knows he doesn't like ... If the problem here was mostly not hearing what he didn't want to hear and telling everyone to shut up and go away when they told him things he didn't want to hear, that's not the intelligence community's fault."

How Biden went about ending U.S. participation in the Afghanistan war has ignited the biggest foreign-policy scandal in the eight months of his presidency. Any evaluation of who should be held accountable for the humanitarian mess centers on two points, one technical, the other political. Biden has said that the "consensus" advice he received was that Afghanistan would not fall to the Taliban until later this year, meaning he thought the U.S. had time to conduct an orderly evacuation. That rosy projection would have come from America's raft of intelligence agencies, along with military officials who trained the Afghan army and diplomats who supposedly understood the staying power of the U.S.-backed Afghan government. "Whoever was saying that was wrong, tragically wrong," Dick Harpootlian, a longtime Biden political ally and a Democratic South Carolina state senator, told me. "If I know Joe Biden, I know he's going to remember who told him that."

Yet Biden also needed to weigh the risks against his long-held view that the U.S. must finally extricate itself from a pointless war. At bottom, that's a political decision. And to make a smart choice, Biden needed unsparing candor from the senior national security advisers he's assembled, among them Blinken and Sullivan. They share a certain biographical affinity: Both are in the most prominent jobs of their lives because of Biden (each served as his national security adviser while he was vice president). Neither has a power base or constituency independent of Biden. And that may make them more inclined to yield to his predilections. Any White House is prey to this sort of deference.

Brett Bruen, an official in Obama's National Security Council, recalled a meeting in the Situation Room in 2014 involving Russia. Aides had come in prepared to make a recommendation, and "as soon as a number of people saw the president heading in another direction, no one was willing to tell him, 'Sir, I think this is important enough for a closer examination,'" he told me. "The way you get ahead in this team is by validating and amplifying what your principal wants to hear." Leon Panetta, a former White House chief of staff under Bill Clinton and the head of the Pentagon and CIA under Obama, told me: "It's pretty clear that people around [Biden], even though they pointed out the problems, just knew that he was very intent on moving as quickly as we could. So, how do you deal with that? From my experience, it's really important to have advisers who are willing to look the president in the eye and say, 'You're making a mistake. There's a better way to do this.'"

A president can, of course, grow in the job by applying hard lessons from past failures. Following the botched attempt to overthrow Fidel Castro in the Bay of Pigs invasion, John F. Kennedy ousted his CIA director, Allen Dulles. "Under a parliamentary system of government, it is I who would be leaving office," Kennedy told him. "But under our system, it is you who must go." During the Cuban missile crisis a year later, Kennedy relied on a more informal national-security advisory group, "ExComm," that would on occasion meet without him so that he didn't inhibit anyone from speaking their mind.

In time, Biden will doubtlessly find someone to punish. Too much has gone wrong to leave voters with the impression that there wasn't any accountability. But demoting or disempowering or reassigning someone immediately only obscures the uncomfortable reality that mistakes in Afghanistan spanned four presidencies, resulting in lives needlessly lost and taxpayer money inexcusably wasted. During a speech earlier this month, Biden said, "The buck stops with me." This was after he blamed a fractious Afghan government and the Afghan military for refusing to fight. (That last point sparked outrage among national-security experts who pointed to the high Afghan death toll. "He said they didn't fight for their country. Yes, they did fight for their country! They lost 70,000 soldiers," Lisa Curtis, a senior director for South and Central Asia in Donald Trump's National Security Council, told me.)

"Could this have been handled better? For sure, and we should look at what went wrong and why it went wrong and who made what decisions," Ivo Daalder, who was the U.S. ambassador to NATO during Obama's first term, told me. That said, he added, "the reason the government collapsed is not because of Jake Sullivan or Lloyd Austin. The reason the government collapsed is because we have fooled ourselves into believing that our support for the Afghan government was sufficient and it would ultimately stand on its own feet. And it didn't. There's been 20 years of failed policy."

Biden, speaking at the White House late this afternoon, vowed to find and punish the attackers. "To those who carried out this attack, as well as anyone who wishes America harm, know this: We will not forgive. We will not forget."

"America will not be intimidated," he added. What is notable about this statement is that Biden was essentially promising the American people that he would hunt down terrorists in Afghanistan, no matter what the price. This wouldn't be the first time Americans have heard this promise from their president.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on August 27, 2021, 05:41:53 AM
Quote from: milk on August 27, 2021, 05:10:38 AM
This is a mirror of what we said about trump. He made it for four years though and only barely lost. I'll say this, if the nominees is Kamala then I agree. She's a loser.

I guess if you want to feed the troll, that's your affair.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on August 27, 2021, 08:26:17 AM
Quote from: Herman on August 27, 2021, 03:32:02 AM
Apart from media bloviating there are just the very bad images of the scenes at the airport and now the hard numbers of dead, too.

Those are not going to go away and there will be no second term.

The people who don't want this to go away are the people who need a scapegoat for their own culpability.  That goes for both the political and media establishments.

If Biden is not re-elected, it will be because of other things.  A sizeable majority of Americans wanted out of Afghanistan.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on August 27, 2021, 09:39:22 AM
Quote from: JBS on August 27, 2021, 08:26:17 AM
The people who don't want this to go away are the people who need a scapegoat for their own culpability.  That goes for both the political and media establishments.

If Biden is not re-elected, it will be because of other things.  A sizeable majority of Americans wanted out of Afghanistan.

Yes, of course people wanted out, but this was done in a bad way.

Also, I don't think this has made the USA "the laughing stock of the world," as someone said above.

I don't see anyone laughing.

I don't doubt chances are a GOP president would have done it in a bad way, too, apart from the fact that a GOP president had the terrible idea to go there in the first place. But this happened under a D president, and the campaign ads write themselves from this week onwards.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on August 27, 2021, 10:02:31 AM
Quote from: Herman on August 27, 2021, 09:39:22 AM
Yes, of course people wanted out, but this was done in a bad way.

Also, I don't think this has made the USA "the laughing stock of the world," as someone said above.

I don't see anyone laughing.

I don't doubt chances are a GOP president would have done it in a bad way, too, apart from the fact that a GOP president had the terrible idea to go there in the first place. But this happened under a D president, and the campaign ads write themselves from this week onwards.

The good way would be what? To leave without attempting to evacuate our collaborators at risk in Afghanistan?

Withdrawal is always a dangerous operation. During the previous administration there was an average of ~15 U.S. deaths per year in Afghanistan. There were many more deaths during the periods of intense operations. It would be an understatement to say that the loss of life is saddening, but it is not out of line with losses sustained on a yearly basis in maintaining the status quo.

Predicting how this event will bear on Joe Biden's political prospects at this point strikes me as pointless and crass.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on August 27, 2021, 10:55:39 AM
ISIS-K, the group behind the Kabul airport attack, sees both Taliban and the U.S. as enemies
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on August 27, 2021, 11:03:57 AM
Judge Parker ordered Team Kraken to "reimburse the State Defendants and the City [of Detroit] for the reasonable fees and costs incurred to defend this action." What this means is that the cadre of government lawyers who toiled on the taxpayer dime to defend this garbage lawsuit can tally up the many hundreds of hours they spent on this action and send Lin Wood and Sidney Powell the bill. Given how spectacularly awful the plaintiffs' lawyers were—"claim[ing] violations of Michigan election law without a thorough understanding of what the law requires"—the judge went even further and imposed "mandatory continuing legal education" on them. In other words, they're off to remedial law school.

Killing the Kraken: Federal Judge Sanctions Trump's Big Lie Lawyers (https://www.thebulwark.com/killing-the-kraken-federal-judge-sanctions-trumps-big-lie-lawyers/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on August 27, 2021, 11:09:57 AM
Quote from: milk on August 27, 2021, 05:08:51 AM
I don't think so. It's called losing. Did you want a plan as good as the one we've had for the last twenty years? If that one didn't work, what makes you think anything else would? This is what I expect when The American military withdraws. Chaos. What did you want to fill the vacuum?

You say that it couldn't have been done any other way, let alone better. I beg to differ. Greatly, actually. But both your statement and mine are unfalsifiable, so we'll never know. Let's just agree to disagree.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on August 27, 2021, 11:30:16 AM
Quote from: Florestan on August 27, 2021, 11:25:32 AM
Yes but in Trump's case it depended on impeachment, which failed. In Biden's case it depends on his obviously, visibly deteriorated and deteriorating mental state. I mean, for God's sake, the guy is senile. The sooner this reality will be acknowledged and taken into account, the better for the USA.

Please stop. People went around for 4 years claiming Trump is senile and now the Right wants to pull the same stunt on Biden.
Neither man shows any sign of being senile.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on August 27, 2021, 01:12:08 PM
After a few drinks, he just cannot stop, you see.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on August 27, 2021, 01:50:01 PM
The hand wringing here is nauseating. Defeat? Laughing stock? You people just don't get it. The objective of the war was achieved: Politicians got to pretend they were doing something decisive about global terrorism, 2.3 trillion dollars went into the pockets of defense contractors and private security firms (with a cut of that going into the reelection campaigns of warmongers), and corrupt Afghan officials' overseas bank accounts in return for their assistance in helping to justify the sham as an effort in nation building. What did you think this was about?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on August 27, 2021, 02:24:18 PM
Quote from: Herman on August 27, 2021, 03:32:02 AM
Apart from media bloviating there are just the very bad images of the scenes at the airport and now the hard numbers of dead, too.

Those are not going to go away and there will be no second term.

You're not taking into account who the R candidate might be and what covid-denying, vaccine-skeptic, constituent-killing and endangering policies they've now tied to. To say nothing of their probable Q-endorsing, Trump-asskissing, insurrection-supporting history.

It's too early to say how the Afghanistan pullout story will be viewed, but I suspect that apart from Fox et al the widely accepted narrative will be the "it was always going to messy" which we are already hearing.

But, yes, its so frustratingly asymmetrical: the Rs have been an absolute clown show in every way for five years straight, but the pullout is messy so that, the punditry has it, obscures everything in the voters mind. Just as Trump on the campaign trail in 2016 can call people enemies and traitors and all manner of other insults literally dozens of times every single day, but Hillary missteping with deplorables once was, supposedly,  the whole ball game.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on August 27, 2021, 02:48:57 PM
Quote from: JBS on August 27, 2021, 11:30:16 AM
Please stop. People went around for 4 years claiming Trump is senile and now the Right wants to pull the same stunt on Biden.
Neither man shows any sign of being senile.

I'd say both are past their prime and both give word-salad interviews.

But I'd take Biden's moral compass as leadership over Trump's complete lack any day, obviously.


Perhaps its just the coverage I get out my way, but I keep wondering why Harris isn't more visible, and they're not getting people used to seeing her as part of top-level strategy.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: VonStupp on August 27, 2021, 03:14:09 PM
Quote from: DavidW on August 26, 2021, 03:12:34 PM
People don't write letters, or pay bills, or collect and sign paperwork through the mail.  They don't request and order through catalogs.  People don't even use netflix dvds anymore.

By don't, do you mean do? Last I heard, Netflix had somewhere around 2 million, DVD-only, US subscribers still, and continue to make a profit from it. Far from the days of milk and honey, I am sure, but quite impressive considering.

Me, I love my Hammacher Schlemmer catalog too!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on August 27, 2021, 03:42:05 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on August 27, 2021, 02:48:57 PM
I'd say both are past their prime and both give word-salad interviews.

But I'd take Biden's moral compass as leadership over Trump's complete lack any day, obviously.


Perhaps its just the coverage I get out my way, but I keep wondering why Harris isn't more visible, and they're not getting people used to seeing her as part of top-level strategy.

Part of it is the ugly truth that the more involved she is, the louder the "he senile's so she's doing his job" chant becomes.

Another ugly truth is the racism and misogyny she's subject to, which can lead to equal counter-distortions in support of her.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on August 27, 2021, 03:58:29 PM
Quote from: JBS on August 27, 2021, 03:42:05 PM
Part of it is the ugly truth that the more involved she is, the louder the "he senile's so she's doing his job" chant becomes.

Another ugly truth is the racism and misogyny she's subject to, which can lead to equal counter-distortions in support of her.

I can see how they might fear that. But on the other hand they should have expected that when she was chosen as running mate and it seems like bad short term thinking rather than beginning to elevate her now as someone who has shown her worth "in the room".
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on August 27, 2021, 06:06:52 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on August 27, 2021, 02:24:18 PM

But, yes, its so frustratingly asymmetrical: the Rs have been an absolute clown show in every way for five years straight, but the pullout is messy so that, the punditry has it, obscures everything in the voters mind.

this asymmetry is what it's about. The GOP appeal to people primal feelings, like, "Biden got Americans killed, it's another Saigon" and there's just no way you reason your way our of that.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on August 27, 2021, 06:42:13 PM
Quote from: Herman on August 27, 2021, 06:06:52 PM
this asymmetry is what it's about. The GOP appeal to people primal feelings, like, "Biden got Americans killed, it's another Saigon" and there's just no way you reason your way our of that.

There's no reasoning the MAGAzoids out of anything.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on August 28, 2021, 02:59:02 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on August 27, 2021, 01:50:01 PM
The hand wringing here is nauseating. Defeat? Laughing stock? You people just don't get it. The objective of the war was achieved: Politicians got to pretend they were doing something decisive about global terrorism, 2.3 trillion dollars went into the pockets of defense contractors and private security firms (with a cut of that going into the reelection campaigns of warmongers), and corrupt Afghan officials' overseas bank accounts in return for their assistance in helping to justify the sham as an effort in nation building. What did you think this was about?

Give me a break man.  Most of us here are not as ill informed as apparently you think we are.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on August 28, 2021, 03:04:43 AM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on August 27, 2021, 10:02:31 AM
The good way would be what? To leave without attempting to evacuate our collaborators at risk in Afghanistan?

Withdrawal is always a dangerous operation. During the previous administration there was an average of ~15 U.S. deaths per year in Afghanistan. There were many more deaths during the periods of intense operations. It would be an understatement to say that the loss of life is saddening, but it is not out of line with losses sustained on a yearly basis in maintaining the status quo.

Predicting how this event will bear on Joe Biden's political prospects at this point strikes me as pointless and crass.

I agree.

In three thousand years of military history I can not think of a single war, campaign or battle were the loser was not screwed.  There was a historian of TV that made the point the Napoleon lost more men when he retreated from Moscow that he did taking it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on August 28, 2021, 03:08:42 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on August 27, 2021, 02:48:57 PM
I'd say both are past their prime and both give word-salad interviews.

But I'd take Biden's moral compass as leadership over Trump's complete lack any day, obviously.


Perhaps its just the coverage I get out my way, but I keep wondering why Harris isn't more visible, and they're not getting people used to seeing her as part of top-level strategy.

Here Here.

Reminds me of the old joke.  A guy came up to me and asked me what my mother-in-law was like and I responded compared to what.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on August 28, 2021, 03:15:08 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 27, 2021, 06:42:13 PM
There's no reasoning the MAGAzoids out of anything.

I believe it is possible to get some MAGAs reasoned out of their beliefs with hard work and patience, but it is a huge uphill fight and it might be next to impossible to de-program enough MAGAs to make a societal difference.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on August 28, 2021, 05:33:24 AM
As to Biden's alleged "word salad" ...

Biden escalates his efforts to puncture the Fox News bubble

By Philip Bump Yesterday at 9:50 a.m. EDT

In a sense, Peter Doocy's arrival in the White House press briefing room has been to his employer's detriment. It used to be that Fox News could spend days condemning Democratic presidents for not responding to whatever controversy its hosts had been tumbling around in their rhetorical rock polishers. Now, though, there's Doocy, who is regularly selected by White House press secretary Jen Psaki to ask questions probably in part so that the familiar process can be beheaded early. Her exchanges with Doocy drop into the political conversation like bang snaps, crackling with life for an instant before being forgotten, the gotcha almost always redirected to the junkyard.

That's at least in part because the questions often reflect a network or right-wing consensus that hasn't been exposed to any significant scrutiny. Little grains of ice snowball into scandals, with Sean Hannity, Dan Bongino and whoever else packing on more and more — and then they get removed from the cooler and placed on the sidewalk. It often doesn't take long for it to melt.

At other times, the inflection of Doocy's question itself gets at the point. As was the case Thursday evening, when President Biden called on Doocy after brief remarks about the suicide bombing outside the airport in Kabul.

"Let me take the one question," Biden said, "from the most interesting guy that I know in the press."

This was not really meant as a compliment.

"Mr. President, there had not been a U.S. service member killed in combat in Afghanistan since February of 2020," Doocy said. "You set a deadline. You pulled troops out. You sent troops back in. And now 12 Marines are dead. You said the buck stops with you. Do you bear any responsibility for the way that things have unfolded in the last two weeks?"

When Donald Trump was asked a similar question in March 2020 about the failure of coronavirus testing, he answered like Donald Trump: "No, I don't take responsibility at all, because we were given a — a set of circumstances, and we were given rules, regulations, and specifications from a different time." Rejection of the idea that he deserved blame and a pivot to his predecessor.

Biden's been doing this longer, so he accepted blame — and then pivoted to his predecessor.

"I bear responsibility for, fundamentally, all that's happened of late," Biden said. "But here's the deal: You know — I wish you'd one day say these things — you know as well as I do that the former president made a deal with the Taliban that he would get all American forces out of Afghanistan by May 1. In return, the commitment was made — and that was a year before — in return, he was given a commitment that the Taliban would continue to attack others, but would not attack any American forces."

This is a fair description. A deal struck between the U.S. government and the Taliban in February 2020 included the trade-off outlined by Biden.

At that point, though, Biden went in a different direction: He challenged Doocy to admit that he knew that his own framing of the question was unsound.

"Remember that? I'm being serious," Biden said to Doocy.

Doocy tried to interject that Trump was no longer the president, but Biden kept at it.

"Now wait a minute," he said. "I'm asking you a question. Is that — is that accurate, to the best of your knowledge?"

"I know what you're talking about," Doocy conceded, before then trying to get Biden to opine on why Americans might be frustrated with the situation in the country. Biden, after resting his head on his hands in apparent frustration, replied that Americans "have an issue that people are likely to get hurt" as they had that day.

He then returned to the prior point: that U.S. forces had avoided attack thanks to the deal made by Trump that had included a withdrawal pledge. This was the case, he said, "whether my friend will acknowledge it" or not — his friend being Doocy.

Fundamentally, that was Biden's point. Doocy and his network often don't provide or consider the context that would subject their theories to heat from the outset. As New York magazine's Jonathan Chait pointed out Thursday, Fox viewers often aren't really tuning in to the network's offerings for a considered debate on the news of the day. What keeps them engaged and watching is the diaspora of voices and range of volumes fuming at the day's outrage.

For all of the right's focus on Biden's mental acuity, he's sufficiently adept at the sort of exchange seen Thursday to be able to put Doocy on the defensive. Not that this friction between Fox News and a Democratic White House is newly emergent. Biden's willingness to engage offensively with Doocy echoes the disparagement and criticisms that were a frequent feature of Barack Obama's administration.

What's different now are the stakes. Fox News is powerful, capturing an audience of millions of viewers a night. It shifted during the Trump administration in part out of an effort to retain the attention of Trump's more fervent supporters. In 2013, Fox News's prime-time lineup flowed from Greta Van Susteren to Bill O'Reilly to Megyn Kelly to what was then its populist anchor, Hannity. Now, the channel is hosting a rotating slot of right-wing personalities in the 7 p.m. hour, before handing things over to Tucker Carlson, Hannity and Laura Ingraham. If those names aren't intimately familiar to you, trust me when I say it's a significant move away from the center.

The network (and Carlson in particular) remains a lodestone for much of the often-self-contained conversation on the political right. In November, after it became obvious that Biden had won the election, I pointed out that with Trump vanquished, Biden's main opponent — misinformation from the right — remained potent. (Right-wing misinformation, driven by Trump, then spent months claiming that no such vanquishing had occurred.) Biden and his team clearly recognize this threat, as evidenced by their willingness to engage with Doocy.

There's an overly neat analogy that could be drawn here about the White House entertaining a representative of a hostile power, but it's not entirely wrong. Doocy gives the White House a way into the often-sealed discourse on the right, a way to draw those snowballs into the sunlight. Psaki and Biden are confident in their ability to handle Doocy's questions and eager to reframe them. It's a bit like doing an interview with a local television station in rural Texas: You're pretty much guaranteed airtime that you wouldn't otherwise get.

Not that it seems to be having much effect.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on August 28, 2021, 05:40:07 AM
David Von Drehle:

[...]

To prepare prudently before bugging out would only have made things worse, they tell us. Simple steps, such as collecting the names and locations of Americans in the country into the best possible database, might have upset people. Expediting paperwork for loyal and endangered Afghans could have created a panic. Threatening some deterrent bombing to slow the overeager Taliban might only have dragged us back in. Squeezing Pakistan to pour less gas on the fire — it has been cashing U.S. checks for two decades while sustaining the Taliban at the same time — well, maybe it was tried. The New York Times reported in June that CIA Director William J. Burns had recently been in Islamabad to discuss the impending withdrawal, but I'd feel better if I knew he was there in January.

Not to pick on Burns. Where's the evidence of any senior official foreseeing the calamity of recent weeks and moving urgently last winter to prepare for worst cases? Did anyone say: "This could be even trickier than wooing Joe Manchin; maybe we ought to make it a priority"?

So Biden owns this, just as Bush owned the accumulated intelligence failures that led to 9/11; just as Jimmy Carter owned the Iranian revolution that was 30 years in the making; just as Gerald Ford owned the last chopper out of Saigon a generation after Harry S. Truman sent the first Americans in.

Even so, it is unseemly for veterans of past administrations to fan the flames roasting Biden after failing in their own time to resolve this mess. In their excesses, many are misleading the public as to the situation in Afghanistan when Biden took office — perhaps they don't know it themselves. The country was not secure. The conflict was not stable. The skeleton force of 2,500 remaining U.S. troops was neither safe nor sufficient to repel the Taliban's promised spring offensive.

The Taliban controlled the entire Afghan countryside, including its network of roads. Military posts intended to defend the cities could be supplied only by airlift, and the lifts conducted by Afghan government forces were so completely corrupted that few supplies got through. Morale among Afghan troops was generally poor. Atop this sad heap sat President Ashraf Ghani, moony-eyed, aloof and ineffective.

Under Obama, the number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan surged to more than 100,000 — and even that enormous number did not defeat the Taliban, who simply melted into the populace or slipped through mountain passes to wait us out in Pakistan. We can now see with brutal clarity that the wispy force of a few thousand in place as Trump left office was not even enough to keep an airport secure, much less the whole country.

Biden inherited the strongest Taliban and the smallest U.S. force in the war's history. That was a very poor hand to play. That he has played his poor hand so poorly is now part of his presidential legacy. Sometimes, it's hell to be chief.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on August 28, 2021, 05:41:41 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 28, 2021, 05:40:07 AM
David Von Drehle:

[...]

To prepare prudently before bugging out would only have made things worse, they tell us. Simple steps, such as collecting the names and locations of Americans in the country into the best possible database, might have upset people. Expediting paperwork for loyal and endangered Afghans could have created a panic. Threatening some deterrent bombing to slow the overeager Taliban might only have dragged us back in. Squeezing Pakistan to pour less gas on the fire — it has been cashing U.S. checks for two decades while sustaining the Taliban at the same time — well, maybe it was tried. The New York Times reported in June that CIA Director William J. Burns had recently been in Islamabad to discuss the impending withdrawal, but I'd feel better if I knew he was there in January.

Not to pick on Burns. Where's the evidence of any senior official foreseeing the calamity of recent weeks and moving urgently last winter to prepare for worst cases? Did anyone say: "This could be even trickier than wooing Joe Manchin; maybe we ought to make it a priority"?

So Biden owns this, just as Bush owned the accumulated intelligence failures that led to 9/11; just as Jimmy Carter owned the Iranian revolution that was 30 years in the making; just as Gerald Ford owned the last chopper out of Saigon a generation after Harry S. Truman sent the first Americans in.

Even so, it is unseemly for veterans of past administrations to fan the flames roasting Biden after failing in their own time to resolve this mess. In their excesses, many are misleading the public as to the situation in Afghanistan when Biden took office — perhaps they don't know it themselves. The country was not secure. The conflict was not stable. The skeleton force of 2,500 remaining U.S. troops was neither safe nor sufficient to repel the Taliban's promised spring offensive.

The Taliban controlled the entire Afghan countryside, including its network of roads. Military posts intended to defend the cities could be supplied only by airlift, and the lifts conducted by Afghan government forces were so completely corrupted that few supplies got through. Morale among Afghan troops was generally poor. Atop this sad heap sat President Ashraf Ghani, moony-eyed, aloof and ineffective.

Under Obama, the number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan surged to more than 100,000 — and even that enormous number did not defeat the Taliban, who simply melted into the populace or slipped through mountain passes to wait us out in Pakistan. We can now see with brutal clarity that the wispy force of a few thousand in place as Trump left office was not even enough to keep an airport secure, much less the whole country.

Biden inherited the strongest Taliban and the smallest U.S. force in the war's history. That was a very poor hand to play. That he has played his poor hand so poorly is now part of his presidential legacy. Sometimes, it's hell to be chief.

I'll go ahead and point out that if the wankmaggot dotard were still president, he would likely have spet this week on the golf course. He certainly would not have faced the press.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on August 28, 2021, 05:47:42 AM
WH official says 6,800 people evacuated from Kabul in 24 hours ending at 3 am today

total evacuated by US/coalition partners since Aug 14: 111,900

context: when effort began, US officials estimated there were 6,000 Americans and up to 65,000 Afghan allies they wanted to get out
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: VonStupp on August 28, 2021, 06:03:58 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 28, 2021, 05:33:24 AM
As to Biden's alleged "word salad" ...

Biden escalates his efforts to puncture the Fox News bubble

By Philip Bump Yesterday at 9:50 a.m. EDT

In a sense, Peter Doocy's arrival in the White House press briefing room has been to his employer's detriment. It used to be that Fox News could spend days condemning Democratic presidents for not responding to whatever controversy its hosts had been tumbling around in their rhetorical rock polishers. Now, though, there's Doocy, who is regularly selected by White House press secretary Jen Psaki to ask questions probably in part so that the familiar process can be beheaded early. Her exchanges with Doocy drop into the political conversation like bang snaps, crackling with life for an instant before being forgotten, the gotcha almost always redirected to the junkyard.

That's at least in part because the questions often reflect a network or right-wing consensus that hasn't been exposed to any significant scrutiny. Little grains of ice snowball into scandals, with Sean Hannity, Dan Bongino and whoever else packing on more and more — and then they get removed from the cooler and placed on the sidewalk. It often doesn't take long for it to melt.

At other times, the inflection of Doocy's question itself gets at the point. As was the case Thursday evening, when President Biden called on Doocy after brief remarks about the suicide bombing outside the airport in Kabul.

"Let me take the one question," Biden said, "from the most interesting guy that I know in the press."

This was not really meant as a compliment.

"Mr. President, there had not been a U.S. service member killed in combat in Afghanistan since February of 2020," Doocy said. "You set a deadline. You pulled troops out. You sent troops back in. And now 12 Marines are dead. You said the buck stops with you. Do you bear any responsibility for the way that things have unfolded in the last two weeks?"

When Donald Trump was asked a similar question in March 2020 about the failure of coronavirus testing, he answered like Donald Trump: "No, I don't take responsibility at all, because we were given a — a set of circumstances, and we were given rules, regulations, and specifications from a different time." Rejection of the idea that he deserved blame and a pivot to his predecessor.

Biden's been doing this longer, so he accepted blame — and then pivoted to his predecessor.

"I bear responsibility for, fundamentally, all that's happened of late," Biden said. "But here's the deal: You know — I wish you'd one day say these things — you know as well as I do that the former president made a deal with the Taliban that he would get all American forces out of Afghanistan by May 1. In return, the commitment was made — and that was a year before — in return, he was given a commitment that the Taliban would continue to attack others, but would not attack any American forces."

This is a fair description. A deal struck between the U.S. government and the Taliban in February 2020 included the trade-off outlined by Biden.

At that point, though, Biden went in a different direction: He challenged Doocy to admit that he knew that his own framing of the question was unsound.

"Remember that? I'm being serious," Biden said to Doocy.

Doocy tried to interject that Trump was no longer the president, but Biden kept at it.

"Now wait a minute," he said. "I'm asking you a question. Is that — is that accurate, to the best of your knowledge?"

"I know what you're talking about," Doocy conceded, before then trying to get Biden to opine on why Americans might be frustrated with the situation in the country. Biden, after resting his head on his hands in apparent frustration, replied that Americans "have an issue that people are likely to get hurt" as they had that day.

He then returned to the prior point: that U.S. forces had avoided attack thanks to the deal made by Trump that had included a withdrawal pledge. This was the case, he said, "whether my friend will acknowledge it" or not — his friend being Doocy.

Fundamentally, that was Biden's point. Doocy and his network often don't provide or consider the context that would subject their theories to heat from the outset. As New York magazine's Jonathan Chait pointed out Thursday, Fox viewers often aren't really tuning in to the network's offerings for a considered debate on the news of the day. What keeps them engaged and watching is the diaspora of voices and range of volumes fuming at the day's outrage.

For all of the right's focus on Biden's mental acuity, he's sufficiently adept at the sort of exchange seen Thursday to be able to put Doocy on the defensive. Not that this friction between Fox News and a Democratic White House is newly emergent. Biden's willingness to engage offensively with Doocy echoes the disparagement and criticisms that were a frequent feature of Barack Obama's administration.

What's different now are the stakes. Fox News is powerful, capturing an audience of millions of viewers a night. It shifted during the Trump administration in part out of an effort to retain the attention of Trump's more fervent supporters. In 2013, Fox News's prime-time lineup flowed from Greta Van Susteren to Bill O'Reilly to Megyn Kelly to what was then its populist anchor, Hannity. Now, the channel is hosting a rotating slot of right-wing personalities in the 7 p.m. hour, before handing things over to Tucker Carlson, Hannity and Laura Ingraham. If those names aren't intimately familiar to you, trust me when I say it's a significant move away from the center.

The network (and Carlson in particular) remains a lodestone for much of the often-self-contained conversation on the political right. In November, after it became obvious that Biden had won the election, I pointed out that with Trump vanquished, Biden's main opponent — misinformation from the right — remained potent. (Right-wing misinformation, driven by Trump, then spent months claiming that no such vanquishing had occurred.) Biden and his team clearly recognize this threat, as evidenced by their willingness to engage with Doocy.

There's an overly neat analogy that could be drawn here about the White House entertaining a representative of a hostile power, but it's not entirely wrong. Doocy gives the White House a way into the often-sealed discourse on the right, a way to draw those snowballs into the sunlight. Psaki and Biden are confident in their ability to handle Doocy's questions and eager to reframe them. It's a bit like doing an interview with a local television station in rural Texas: You're pretty much guaranteed airtime that you wouldn't otherwise get.

Not that it seems to be having much effect.

This is why I view news more as entertainment now. It seems news is a vehicle to support ones political viewpoint (from both sides) instead of merely informing me; there always has to be a motive. Some days The Onion is just as helpful as the main news outlets.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on August 28, 2021, 07:12:22 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on August 27, 2021, 03:58:29 PM
I can see how they might fear that. But on the other hand they should have expected that when she was chosen as running mate and it seems like bad short term thinking rather than beginning to elevate her now as someone who has shown her worth "in the room".
If Biden runs again and performs like he did last time around, he can win again. Harris is an awful politician and a flimsy person. I don't believe she can win. If Biden is out, Dems will have to come up with someone else to have a chance.

Re Afghanistan: the military and situation on the ground is what it is. Losing the war is losing the war. A president is either going to follow the timetable trump set, or dither. I agree with the "rip the bandaid" analogy.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on August 28, 2021, 08:55:50 AM
Quote from: milk on August 28, 2021, 07:12:22 AMRe Afghanistan: the military and situation on the ground is what it is. Losing the war is losing the war. A president is either going to follow the timetable trump set, or dither. I agree with the "rip the bandaid" analogy.

I'm really tired of this statement that we "lost" the war. There is more nuance to military science than "we won" or "we lost." After WWII Japan was in ruins and it was occupied and controlled by it a foreign power. The same for Germany. That's losing a war. The U.S. entered Afghanistan and achieved its immediate military objectives. It ran Al Qaeda and Bin Laden out of the country, it put the Taliban out of power during the interval we were engaged. Then what? We hung around for another 20 years as an occupying power and proped up a corrupt puppet regime. We finally decided that was a waste of effort and left. We did not achieve our unrealistic geopolitical objectives. That and sustaining 13 casualties during a complex withdrawal does not constitute "losing the war." If I walked outside and saw the Taliban forcing women in Texas to wear Burkas, then I'd say we lost the war.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on August 28, 2021, 09:08:57 AM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on August 28, 2021, 08:55:50 AM
I'm really tired of this statement that we "lost" the war. There is more nuance to military science than "we won" or "we lost." After WWII Japan was in ruins and it was occupied and controlled by it a foreign power. The same for Germany. That's losing a war. The U.S. entered Afghanistan and achieved its immediate military objectives. It ran Al Qaeda and Bin Laden out of the country, it put the Taliban out of power during the interval we were engaged. Then what? We hung around for another 20 years as an occupying power and proped up a corrupt puppet regime. We finally decided that was a waste of effort and left. We did not achieve our unrealistic geopolitical objectives. That and sustaining 13 casualties during a complex withdrawal does not constitute "losing the war." If I walked outside and saw the Taliban forcing women in Texas to wear Burkas, then I'd say we lost the war.

Thank you for being the person who finally said this. In terms of achieving our objectives for going there, the war was won (handily) the minute Bin Laden's corpse dropped into the ocean. As I have maintained for many years now, Obama's failure to declare victory and totally withdraw us from there in 2011 while we were riding the crest of the wave generated by that event was but one of the many opportunities we failed to take advantage of and get the hell out. If it had ever been a 'war for hearts and minds', then it was lost before it ever began.

8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on August 28, 2021, 09:20:39 AM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on August 28, 2021, 08:55:50 AM
I'm really tired of this statement that we "lost" the war. There is more nuance to military science than "we won" or "we lost." After WWII Japan was in ruins and it was occupied and controlled by it a foreign power. The same for Germany. That's losing a war. The U.S. entered Afghanistan and achieved its immediate military objectives. It ran Al Qaeda and Bin Laden out of the country, it put the Taliban out of power during the interval we were engaged. Then what? We hung around for another 20 years as an occupying power and proped up a corrupt puppet regime. We finally decided that was a waste of effort and left. We did not achieve our unrealistic geopolitical objectives. That and sustaining 13 casualties during a complex withdrawal does not constitute "losing the war." If I walked outside and saw the Taliban forcing women in Texas to wear Burkas, then I'd say we lost the war.

I think the distinction between losing and failing to meet any major objectives is overly fine.  The USA and allies not only failed a "nation building" but even as recent events involving ISIS-K seem to indicate, failed to drive out terrorists.

As I said earlier in this thread, the USA and allies ought to have bailed on Afghanistan a decade ago, IMHO.  Granted, I ascribed the failure to tribal disunity and Afghan leadership and not so much allied ineptitude.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on August 28, 2021, 10:42:19 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on August 28, 2021, 09:20:39 AM
I think the distinction between losing and failing to meet any major objectives is overly fine.  The USA and allies not only failed a "nation building" but even as recent events involving ISIS-K seem to indicate, failed to drive out terrorists.

As I said earlier in this thread, the USA and allies ought to have bailed on Afghanistan a decade ago, IMHO.  Granted, I ascribed the failure to tribal disunity and Afghan leadership and not so much allied ineptitude.

Whenever was 'nation-building' part of the original objectives of that conflict? The original objective was to make Afghanistan inhospitable to Al Qaeda as a safe haven and training ground and to kill Bin Laden. Period. There never was any nation-building in the plan, it was an add-on in order to justify staying. That was a mistake, as Biden openly said the other day in his remarks. Afg has never been, and will never be, a united democratic country and efforts to make it one are doomed to fail. That is why I said, and maintain, that we should have left the day after Bin Laden was killed. Mission accomplished.

8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on August 28, 2021, 10:44:32 AM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on August 28, 2021, 10:42:19 AM
Whenever was 'nation-building' part of the original objectives of that conflict? The original objective was to make Afghanistan inhospitable to Al Qaeda as a safe haven and training ground and to kill Bin Laden. Period. There never was any nation-building in the plan, it was an add-on in order to justify staying. That was a mistake, as Biden openly said the other day in his remarks. Afg has never been, and will never be, a united democratic country and efforts to make it one are doomed to fail. That is why I said, and maintain, that we should have left the day after Bin Laden was killed. Mission accomplished.

8)

Agreed.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on August 28, 2021, 12:20:58 PM
Quote from: milk on August 28, 2021, 07:12:22 AM
Harris is an awful politician and a flimsy person.

That's not at all my assessment of her from this distance.

What makes you say this?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on August 28, 2021, 12:46:28 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on August 28, 2021, 12:20:58 PM
That's not at all my assessment of her from this distance.

What makes you say this?

She is a Democrat.  As far as most Republicans think all Democrats suck.  The reason I know this is because up to the age of fifty I was a conservative Republican and that is the way I use to think.  One of the many reasons I am no longer a Republican is that I got to know Democrats and I discovered that they were not the jerks they were made out to be.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on August 28, 2021, 12:48:47 PM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on August 28, 2021, 10:42:19 AM
Whenever was 'nation-building' part of the original objectives of that conflict? The original objective was to make Afghanistan inhospitable to Al Qaeda as a safe haven and training ground and to kill Bin Laden. Period. There never was any nation-building in the plan, it was an add-on in order to justify staying. ...

Quite correct.  "Nation building" became an object, albeit it wasn't an originals object, at least not one publicly stated.  In any case the USA failed in original object too given that terrorists are active today in Afghanistan though they my be ISIS-K rather than Al Qaeda.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on August 28, 2021, 12:53:15 PM
Quote from: milk on August 28, 2021, 07:12:22 AM
If Biden runs again and performs like he did last time around, he can win again. Harris is an awful politician and a flimsy person. I don't believe she can win. If Biden is out, Dems will have to come up with someone else to have a chance.

In as much as Harris doesn't strike me as having the least sympathetic charisma, I agree.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on August 28, 2021, 01:55:07 PM
The Former Guy, Mr Presumptive Nominee:

"And we took out the founder of ISIS, al-Baghdadi, and then of course Soleimani. Now just so you understand, Soleimani is bigger by many, many times than Osama bin Laden. The founder of ISIS is bigger by many, many times, al-Baghdadi, than Osama bin Laden.

Osama bin Laden had one hit, and it was a bad one, in New York City, the World Trade Center. But these other two guys were monsters. They were monsters."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on August 28, 2021, 02:38:47 PM
Quote from: Fëanor on August 28, 2021, 12:48:47 PM
Quite correct.  "Nation building" became an object, albeit it wasn't an originals object, at least not one publicly stated.  In any case the USA failed in original object too given that terrorists are active today in Afghanistan though they my be ISIS-K rather than Al Qaeda.

It would have been nice to have coopted the Afghan government, but there again, the hearts and minds battle was unwinnable. When Trump excluded the duly constituted government from the negotiations in Doha last year, he effectively eliminated our last option for influencing events after withdrawal. I am 100% in favor of Biden's actions so far, although I freely admit that is based on my absolute belief that getting out of there is absolutely the right thing to do.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on August 28, 2021, 06:53:22 PM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on August 28, 2021, 02:38:47 PM
I am 100% in favor of Biden's actions so far, although I freely admit that is based on my absolute belief that getting out of there is absolutely the right thing to do.

I agree.

Any withdrawal would have been a mess, whether is was six months ago or six months from now.

Biden made the decision that it was about time to cut our losses and withdraw.  Whether he deserves it or not he will have to take the heat for it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on August 29, 2021, 02:08:55 AM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on August 28, 2021, 02:38:47 PM
I am 100 % in favor of Biden's actions so far, although I freely admit that is based on my absolute belief that getting out of there is absolutely the right thing to do.

The American lefties I have been following for years (althou much less this year) agree with you. They have been criticizing Biden a lot for not being lefty enough, but with this they give him 100 % support.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on August 29, 2021, 04:19:21 AM
Quote from: arpeggio on August 28, 2021, 12:46:28 PM
She is a Democrat.  As far as most Republicans think all Democrats suck.  The reason I know this is because up to the age of fifty I was a conservative Republican and that is the way I use to think.  One of the many reasons I am no longer a Republican is that I got to know Democrats and I discovered that they were not the jerks they were made out to be.
I'm not a republican. I think Biden can win again. Harris was a terrible candidate when she ran in the primaries; hence her early exit. She had no original positions and she seems very corporate and middle-of-the-road to me. She communicates badly, i.e. she seems insincere and not particularly smart. I thought Warren was a much better candidate even though she also sort of tanked herself with some bad life choices. But when Warren speaks in the senate, she knows what she's talking about and she has a mission. Harris's mission is herself and she's not a particularly good advocate of herself.

As for "losing" or "failing," think about it as you will. My only point is that the thing has been a mess for years and I don't expect any president to make it look good on the way out. I don't know, I assume there are things Biden could have done better but I still give him high marks for sticking to this withdrawal.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on August 29, 2021, 11:10:56 AM
I just saw Lindsey Graham make a prediction on CBS.

He predicted that all sorts of horrible things were going to happen in Afghanistan. 

Really? Did you figure that all by yourself or did your mommy and daddy help.

Of course all sorts of horrible stuff are going to happen in Afghanistan.  I would be stunned if all sorts of horrible stuff did not happen.

I have been wracking by brains trying to think of any campaign going back to the Battle of Kadesh in 1274BC trying to find one were the loser did not suffer negative consequences.  Sometimes the winner suffers as much as the loser.

The Duke of Wellington said, "Nothing except a battle lost can be as half so melancholy as a battle won."

Even great leaders can make bad decisions which may result in a catastrophe .  Look at all of the Confederate Soldiers who were slaughtered at Pickett's Charge when Lee made the decision to attack the Union Center at Gettysburg.  A lot more than a dozen.



Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on August 29, 2021, 11:14:23 AM
Now that he's no longer playing golf with doofus, Lindsey is struggling for relevance.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on August 29, 2021, 11:20:14 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 29, 2021, 11:14:23 AM
Now that he's no longer playing golf with doofus, Lindsey is struggling for relevance.

I think my favorite two faced Linsey moment was when he said that he was through with Trump and then later that week he was in Air Force One with him! :D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on August 29, 2021, 11:21:59 AM
Quote from: DavidW on August 29, 2021, 11:20:14 AM
I think my favorite two faced Linsey moment was when he said that he was through with Trump and then later that week he was in Air Force One with him! :D

Yep!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Iota on August 29, 2021, 11:44:24 AM
Quote from: arpeggio on August 29, 2021, 11:10:56 AM
The Duke of Wellington said, "Nothing except a battle lost can be as half so melancholy as a battle won."

What a striking and moving quote! Hadn't heard it before, thanks for posting.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on August 30, 2021, 01:09:17 AM
Quote from: arpeggio on August 29, 2021, 11:10:56 AM
I just saw Lindsey Graham make a prediction on CBS.

He predicted that all sorts of horrible things were going to happen in Afghanistan.

How much did the US main stream media talk about Afganistan last year? Taliban didn't exist last year? Taliban didn't control half the country? The second Biden did something the military industry complex and imperialists do not like, all eyes are on what happens in Afganistan. Yes, horrible things will happen in Afganistan. Has been happening all the time. Lindsey Graham just didn't care until now, because he collects cheques from the military industry complex.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on August 30, 2021, 01:30:59 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on August 30, 2021, 01:09:17 AM
How much did the US main stream media talk about Afganistan last year?


Why not try answering your own question? Go to the sites of what you think of as "mainstream media" and search for articles on Afghanistan from 2020. You might be surprised

It's possible though that there was some other stuff going on in 2020 that pushed it off the front page.

And just how much did your preferred YT infotainment jesters have to say about Afghanistan last year?

Oh and could I please have a source with some specific details about the cheques Lindsay Graham is getting from the "military industry [sic] complex"?

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on August 30, 2021, 01:55:09 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on August 30, 2021, 01:30:59 AM
Why not try answering your own question? Go to the sites of what you think of as "mainstream media" and search for articles on Afghanistan from 2020. You might be surprised

It's possible though that there was some other stuff going on in 2020 that pushed it off the front page.

And just how much did your preferred YT infotainment jesters have to say about Afghanistan last year?

Oh and could I please have a source with some specific details about the cheques Lindsay Graham is getting from the "military industry [sic] complex"?

Wow. I tried to come back to this thread, but clearly I am not wanted here. I am out.

(for example in 2015-2016 alone Lindsay Graham got $45,886 from Boeing (part of military industry complex), but since you don't even want to believe ANYTHING I say why do I bother. I don't know on what planet you live on. I am out).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on August 30, 2021, 02:31:59 AM
That's part of what I asked for. But I still want a source.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on August 30, 2021, 06:39:36 AM
He who is not guilty caste the first stone. 

At one time even I thought that maybe the United States could have won in Afghanistan.  I was wrong.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on August 30, 2021, 06:41:39 AM
Quote from: arpeggio on August 30, 2021, 06:39:36 AM
He who is not guilty caste the first stone. 

At one time even I thought that maybe the United States could have won in Afghanistan.  I was wrong.

You weren't alone, though I was not in that number.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on September 01, 2021, 11:51:07 AM
There are two "con" opinions against this "pro" in the Globe.

Sirhan should be paroled

By Rachelle G. Cohen Globe Staff, Updated August 31, 2021, 3:20 p.m.

There are moments so tragic they are seared in memory. The 1968 assassination of Robert F. Kennedy — on whom so many of us had pinned so many youthful hopes — was one of them. Coming just two months after the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr., it was a second punch to the gut and a sign the world had truly gone mad.

No, I'll never forget, and I'll never forgive his assassin, Sirhan Sirhan, for robbing my generation of a hero, for taking away all the might-have-beens — and for robbing a family of a husband and a father.

But parole — as recently recommended by California parole commissioners for Sirhan — isn't about forgiveness. It isn't a pardon; it doesn't erase the record.

And heaven help us if it ever becomes about politics.

Parole is and always has been based on rehabilitation, the expression of remorse, and the likelihood of an inmate to re-offend. It shouldn't matter if the victim was a Kennedy or a Smith or a Jones. It shouldn't matter whether my dreams were shattered, a nation was deprived of a future leader, and a passel of kids were left fatherless.

What should matter is whether justice is being served, whether this particular prisoner is being treated any differently than the guy in the next cell with the same record of spotless behavior, the same likelihood not to pose a future risk to public safety.

Sirhan was 24 at the time he shot then-presidential contender Robert Kennedy — a moment captured on live television as the world and at least one of his sons watched. Sirhan claims not to remember much of that night and concedes that he had been drinking. His defense team made the case that he was mentally ill at the time of the shooting, and experts brought in by the prosecution agreed.

But he went to trial nevertheless, was found guilty of first-degree murder, and sentenced to death in 1969. When California eliminated the death penalty in 1972, he was re-sentenced to life in prison. However, as Parole Board Commissioner Robert Barton said at Sirhan's hearing, "If you were sentenced to life without parole that would be a different matter, but you were sent to life with parole."

In fact, Sirhan has been eligible for parole since 1975. He's now 77 and has been behind bars for 53 years; this was his 16th parole hearing.

"Over half a century has passed," Sirhan told the two parole commissioners, "and that young, impulsive kid I was does not exist anymore. . . . Senator Kennedy was the hope of the world and I injured, and I harmed all of them, and it pains me to experience that, the knowledge for such a horrible deed."

His lawyer noted in her brief that Sirhan has had no disciplinary violations since 1972. In fact, three correction officers filed letters of support on his behalf, and Barton said, "We saw the improvement that you've made," noting Sirhan has enrolled in more than 20 prison programs.

The parole board is also required, under a 2018 law, to take into account that Sirhan was a youthful offender at the time of sentencing, had suffered childhood trauma as a Christian Palestinian refugee, and that he now qualifies for "elderly parole," having served more than 20 years and being well over the required age of 50.

"You have my pledge. I will always look to safety and peace and nonviolence," Sirhan told the hearing officers.

Our nation's corrections system is based on the concept that rehabilitation works and remorse counts for something. Parole is held out as the potential reward for doing the right thing. If it is denied for political reasons, it becomes meaningless.

The decision by the two-member panel to grant Sirhan parole now goes to the full parole board, and if they support the decision, the matter ultimately goes to Governor Gavin Newsom.

No one is asking any of those officials to forgive Sirhan's crime and certainly not to forget the price this nation paid for it. But none of that should matter. For the parole board, Sirhan Sirhan should be just another prisoner who played by the rules — no more, but no less.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on September 02, 2021, 02:22:24 PM
Quote from: arpeggio on August 30, 2021, 06:39:36 AM
He who is not guilty caste the first stone. 

At one time even I thought that maybe the United States could have won in Afghanistan.  I was wrong.

Won? What is there to win? What would winning mean? It's frickin' Afghanistan. Do you want a cut of the opium trade?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on September 03, 2021, 08:26:38 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on September 02, 2021, 02:22:24 PM
Won? What is there to win? What would winning mean? It's frickin' Afghanistan. Do you want a cut of the opium trade?

Without going into details, I will admit I was wrong.  What else do you want? A person can not admit he made a mistake around here? Give me a break.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on September 04, 2021, 04:37:13 AM
Quote from: arpeggio on August 30, 2021, 06:39:36 AM
He who is not guilty caste the first stone. 

At one time even I thought that maybe the United States could have won in Afghanistan.  I was wrong.

The militaristic way the US does nation building and imperialism is old-fashioned. The new way is to invest in infrastructure and economy and that way "own" the country. That's what China is doing and whether we like it or not it is working.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on September 04, 2021, 05:31:55 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on September 04, 2021, 04:37:13 AM
The militaristic way the US does nation building and imperialism is old-fashioned. The new way is to invest in infrastructure and economy and that way "own" the country. That's what China is doing and whether we like it or not it is working.

This is scarily true.  A few things are notable re. China's approach:
In some respects China's approach more closely resembles British & French imperialism of the latter 19th century than the USA's 20th century neo-imperialism.  Direct control of natural resource is probably the most notable aspect.  That is, China wants direct control versus just preferred market access.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: krummholz on September 05, 2021, 06:14:04 AM
Quote from: milk on August 29, 2021, 04:19:21 AM
I'm not a republican. I think Biden can win again. Harris was a terrible candidate when she ran in the primaries; hence her early exit. She had no original positions and she seems very corporate and middle-of-the-road to me. She communicates badly, i.e. she seems insincere and not particularly smart. I thought Warren was a much better candidate even though she also sort of tanked herself with some bad life choices. But when Warren speaks in the senate, she knows what she's talking about and she has a mission. Harris's mission is herself and she's not a particularly good advocate of herself.

As for "losing" or "failing," think about it as you will. My only point is that the thing has been a mess for years and I don't expect any president to make it look good on the way out. I don't know, I assume there are things Biden could have done better but I still give him high marks for sticking to this withdrawal.

It isn't just that Biden's withdrawal was messy and didn't look good. It's not even that the way he handled the withdrawal made lots of people question his competence. The most serious consequence IMO is that the US government failed to live up to its promises to thousands of Afghans who cooperated with the coalition campaign, acted as interpreters, intelligence assets, etc. The sad fact is that The US will be on the ground again somewhere, someday soon (we actually have been all along), these campaigns require support and cooperation from ordinary people in the local area, and this debacle is going to make it much harder for anyone to ever trust us again.

It's bad enough that Trump did such huge damage to the US's reputation on the world stage, but he was a novice who refused to learn, so that was predictable and he could plausibly be written off as a one-off. But for a seasoned professional like Biden to follow up with more damage, when many of us who voted for him expected him to repair the damage Trump caused, is very bad news indeed.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on September 05, 2021, 06:45:00 AM
Quote from: krummholz on September 05, 2021, 06:14:04 AM
1. The most serious consequence IMO is that the US government failed to live up to its promises to thousands of Afghans who cooperated with the coalition campaign, acted as interpreters, intelligence assets, etc.

2. But for a seasoned professional like Biden to follow up with more damage, when many of us who voted for him expected him to repair the damage Trump caused, is very bad news indeed.

1. Those "promises" never were much more than empty words.

2. The damage was done 2 decades ago by the Bush administration when the US went to Afganistan. Biden had the guts to cut the losses of a war without clear realistic goals. The left praises him for that. Obama didn't have the guts. Trump didn't have the guts. Biden has the guts and I give him credit for that. It's crazy to think the US really cares about the rights of women in Afganistan while the US itself is turning slowly into "the handmaiden's tale" (e.g. the new abortion laws in Texas).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: krummholz on September 05, 2021, 09:25:53 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on September 05, 2021, 06:45:00 AM
1. Those "promises" never were much more than empty words.

I have no doubt that many of the Afghans left behind feel exactly that way now. And anyone in a foreign country that the US might try to recruit to aid us in any way. I know you don't live in the US, Poju, but don't you see that as a serious problem for a world power trying to defend itself against adversaries that wish to cause mayhem and terror at home?

Quote
2. The damage was done 2 decades ago by the Bush administration when the US went to Afganistan. Biden had the guts to cut the losses of a war without clear realistic goals. The left praises him for that. Obama didn't have the guts. Trump didn't have the guts. Biden has the guts and I give him credit for that. It's crazy to think the US really cares about the rights of women in Afganistan while the US itself is turning slowly into "the handmaiden's tale" (e.g. the new abortion laws in Texas).

Plenty of damage was done by earlier administrations, but it was Trump who first made serious noise about not honouring agreements like the Paris climate accords, NATO commitments, etc. And his "courtship" of the dictator Kim Jong-un made the US into a laughingstock the world over. Not to mention his deference to Putin in Helsinki. That's the "damage" I was referring to, plus Trump's signing of an idiotically one-sided agreement with the Taliban, largely against the wishes of the other coalition nations. The US upholding its commitments is an important part of the glue holding alliances together that have kept widespread armed conflict from breaking out in Europe since WW2. Further damage to our reputation as a reliable ally is IMO something we can ill afford.

I didn't say anything about US "caring" about the rights of women in Afghanistan... as awful and tragic as that situation is, I don't think either party today has the stomach to commit US troops to interfere in a purely internal matter... nor, IMHO, should they.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on September 05, 2021, 11:32:23 AM
Quote from: krummholz on September 05, 2021, 09:25:53 AM
I have no doubt that many of the Afghans left behind feel exactly that way now. And anyone in a foreign country that the US might try to recruit to aid us in any way. I know you don't live in the US, Poju, but don't you see that as a serious problem for a world power trying to defend itself against adversaries that wish to cause mayhem and terror at home?

Sure it is a problem. This is the planet of problems. Then again, attacking Kentucky is not high on the "to do" list of Talibans, is it? Their main interest is to be in power in their own region and now they are.

Quote from: krummholz on September 05, 2021, 09:25:53 AMPlenty of damage was done by earlier administrations, but it was Trump who first made serious noise about not honouring agreements like the Paris climate accords, NATO commitments, etc. And his "courtship" of the dictator Kim Jong-un made the US into a laughingstock the world over. Not to mention his deference to Putin in Helsinki. That's the "damage" I was referring to, plus Trump's signing of an idiotically one-sided agreement with the Taliban, largely against the wishes of the other coalition nations. The US upholding its commitments is an important part of the glue holding alliances together that have kept widespread armed conflict from breaking out in Europe since WW2. Further damage to our reputation as a reliable ally is IMO something we can ill afford.

Yes, Trump did tons of damage to the reputation of the US. Biden has I believe "corrected" some of those (e.g. Paris climate accord).

Quote from: krummholz on September 05, 2021, 09:25:53 AMI didn't say anything about US "caring" about the rights of women in Afghanistan... as awful and tragic as that situation is, I don't think either party today has the stomach to commit US troops to interfere in a purely internal matter... nor, IMHO, should they.

You didn't, but the msm keeps saying that as an excuse for forever wars.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: krummholz on September 05, 2021, 11:51:45 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on September 05, 2021, 11:32:23 AM
Sure it is a problem. This is the planet of problems. Then again, attacking Kentucky is not high on the "to do" list of Talibans, is it? Their main interest is to be in power in their own region and now they are.

Not that I know of... but they may not be able to keep groups like Al Qaeda (with whom they are intimately connected) and Daesh from using the Afghanistan countryside as a base of operations... and THOSE groups most definitely would attack Kentucky or Texas if given the opportunity.

QuoteYes, Trump did tons of damage to the reputation of the US. Biden has I believe "corrected" some of those (e.g. Paris climate accord).

He did, but that does not (IMO) make up for the damage he did to that reputation by letting down thousands of people who helped us and our coalition partners.

Quote
You didn't, but the msm keeps saying that as an excuse for forever wars.

Most of the msm in this country were very much against the war in Afghanistan, much less the idea of "forever wars". And the popular support in the US for leaving Afghanistan has been overwhelming... it is the WAY that Biden did it that has drawn most of the fire.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on September 06, 2021, 04:43:07 AM
Quote from: krummholz on September 05, 2021, 11:51:45 AM
Not that I know of... but they may not be able to keep groups like Al Qaeda (with whom they are intimately connected) and Daesh from using the Afghanistan countryside as a base of operations... and THOSE groups most definitely would attack Kentucky or Texas if given the opportunity.

To my knowledge almost all terrorist attacks in the US are domestic far-right wing attacks. Main stream media may not be open about this, but that's what the statistics say I believe. What happened in January 6th? Did Al Qaeda attack Orlando? No, far-right wingers attacked democracy. Rumour has it September 18th there will be another "Trump riot" organized by far-right extremist groups like the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers. Lets hope nothing comes out of this. The sad truth is that at this point some people in the US have been so badly radicalized, that the US actually has its own Al Qaeda and what happens in some States reminds Taliban rule to certain extent, just based on different religion.

Quote from: krummholz on September 05, 2021, 11:51:45 AMHe did, but that does not (IMO) make up for the damage he did to that reputation by letting down thousands of people who helped us and our coalition partners.

I think in the future this will be seen in its context and the actions of Biden will be seen in a more positive light. Yes,  thousands of people were let down, but then again, the US is letting down millions of its own citizens every day: No healthcare. No living wage. No clean water etc. That's what Biden should be criticized for and I do.

Quote from: krummholz on September 05, 2021, 11:51:45 AMMost of the msm in this country were very much against the war in Afghanistan, much less the idea of "forever wars". And the popular support in the US for leaving Afghanistan has been overwhelming... it is the WAY that Biden did it that has drawn most of the fire.

20 years ago I did not follow US politics at all and knew absolutely nothing about it. In my idiotic ignorance I thought the US always does good with its military operations over the World and most muslims are just bad evil people. I have come a long way from that and now I know the US is actually the number one terrorist country in the World. My sources tell the msm did lie to Americans about he necessity to attack Afghanistan, but maybe my sources are the liers and you are right. I don't have a way to know. The World has become a place where a lot of people lie on purpose and still can sleep at night somehow. Who can you trust anymore? All I can say is that I don't purposedly lie. My personality type (INTJ/P) makes me a truth-based honest person. If I say something false it is because I am wrong/stupid/ignorant, not because I purposedly lie.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: krummholz on September 06, 2021, 05:22:12 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on September 06, 2021, 04:43:07 AM
To my knowledge almost all terrorist attacks in the US are domestic far-right wing attacks. Main stream media may not be open about this, but that's what the statistics say I believe. What happened in January 6th? Did Al Qaeda attack Orlando? No, far-right wingers attacked democracy. Rumour has it September 18th there will be another "Trump riot" organized by far-right extremist groups like the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers. Lets hope nothing comes out of this. The sad truth is that at this point some people in the US have been so badly radicalized, that the US actually has its own Al Qaeda and what happens in some States reminds Taliban rule to certain extent, just based on different religion.

It's quite true that the vast majority of terrorist attacks in the US have been of the domestic variety - but that does not diminish the threat from jihadism. And indeed, as you point out, some disaffected Americans have been radicalized themselves, mainly by Daesh I believe, and have joined terrorist cells operating in Syria, Iraq, and elsewhere. But the same is true of European countries; there have been British nationals recruited into Daesh, for instance. The rest of your argument about Taliban-like rule in the US is so far over the top it barely merits a reply. Yes, we do have a large contingent of would-be theocrats that would like nothing more than to impose the Judeo-Christian version of Sharia law on the US. But we also have a constitutional democracy that has withstood stresses that have toppled less stable governments. The US survived January 6, after all. Eternal vigilance is necessary, yes. But on both fronts - to neglect the threat posed by international terrorism is to leave oneself open to another attack such as what happened 20 years ago next Saturday.

QuoteI think in the future this will be seen in its context and the actions of Biden will be seen in a more positive light. Yes,  thousands of people were let down, but then again, the US is letting down millions of its own citizens every day: No healthcare. No living wage. No clean water etc. That's what Biden should be criticized for and I do.

It is too soon to say how history will judge Biden's handling of the Afghanistan withdrawal. It all depends on how the situation unfolds there. But the domestic situation re: poverty and healthcare is not relevant to my point about the reputation of the US as an ally. I'm not talking about moral imperatives here but geopolitical ones.

Quote20 years ago I did not follow US politics at all and knew absolutely nothing about it. In my idiotic ignorance I thought the US always does good with its military operations over the World and most muslims are just bad evil people. I have come a long way from that and now I know the US is actually the number one terrorist country in the World. My sources tell the msm did lie to Americans about he necessity to attack Afghanistan, but maybe my sources are the liers and you are right. I don't have a way to know. The World has become a place where a lot of people lie on purpose and still can sleep at night somehow. Who can you trust anymore? All I can say is that I don't purposedly lie. My personality type (INTJ/P) makes me a truth-based honest person. If I say something false it is because I am wrong/stupid/ignorant, not because I purposedly lie.

I rely largely on the public radio and tv outlets NPR and PBS, and to a lesser extent the BBC, for most of my news. To my knowledge the msm in the US very rarely outright lies - but they do sometimes report things that later turn out to be false. In most cases they issue a correction - at least NPR and PBS do. The msm were almost certainly lied to by the Bush 43 administration about the purported existence of WMD in Iraq that led to our invading that country; I doubt seriously that they knew it was a lie. Trump-friendly media, well consider whom they are in bed with. Of course they lie. But they are not the msm. I do not think you are lying, Poju, but I wonder what sources you are listening to. The US is the #1 terrorist country in the world? This sounds like propaganda out of the Kremlin or the CCP. Our hands are not squeaky clean and we have made many mistakes. But to call the US a terrorist country is, I think, to stretch the definition of "terrorist" beyond all recognition.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on September 06, 2021, 10:28:14 AM
Quote from: krummholz on September 06, 2021, 05:22:12 AM
It's quite true that the vast majority of terrorist attacks in the US have been of the domestic variety - but that does not diminish the threat from jihadism. And indeed, as you point out, some disaffected Americans have been radicalized themselves, mainly by Daesh I believe, and have joined terrorist cells operating in Syria, Iraq, and elsewhere. But the same is true of European countries; there have been British nationals recruited into Daesh, for instance. The rest of your argument about Taliban-like rule in the US is so far over the top it barely merits a reply. Yes, we do have a large contingent of would-be theocrats that would like nothing more than to impose the Judeo-Christian version of Sharia law on the US. But we also have a constitutional democracy that has withstood stresses that have toppled less stable governments. The US survived January 6, after all. Eternal vigilance is necessary, yes. But on both fronts - to neglect the threat posed by international terrorism is to leave oneself open to another attack such as what happened 20 years ago next Saturday.

It is too soon to say how history will judge Biden's handling of the Afghanistan withdrawal. It all depends on how the situation unfolds there. But the domestic situation re: poverty and healthcare is not relevant to my point about the reputation of the US as an ally. I'm not talking about moral imperatives here but geopolitical ones.

I rely largely on the public radio and tv outlets NPR and PBS, and to a lesser extent the BBC, for most of my news. To my knowledge the msm in the US very rarely outright lies - but they do sometimes report things that later turn out to be false. In most cases they issue a correction - at least NPR and PBS do. The msm were almost certainly lied to by the Bush 43 administration about the purported existence of WMD in Iraq that led to our invading that country; I doubt seriously that they knew it was a lie. Trump-friendly media, well consider whom they are in bed with. Of course they lie. But they are not the msm. I do not think you are lying, Poju, but I wonder what sources you are listening to. The US is the #1 terrorist country in the world? This sounds like propaganda out of the Kremlin or the CCP. Our hands are not squeaky clean and we have made many mistakes. But to call the US a terrorist country is, I think, to stretch the definition of "terrorist" beyond all recognition.

This is getting long and I maybe should try to regulate and limit my activity on this thread given the past problems. So, some short remarks:

Nobody suggests the US should neglect international terrorism, of course not, but it can be done without occupying a country for decades. Change of information is an effective way to stop terrorism: People can be arrested and stopped before they commit terrorist attacks. Also, the root causes of terrorism can be addressed.

You probably follow yourself some of the more reliable sources, but many Americans don't do that. For them it is Fox News/Tucker Carlson, not NPR. The lies are clever: Calling things 50/50 when they are 99/1. Making people doubt facts. Omitting information. You can do a lot of dishonest reporting without actually telling lies.

I'm not listening to Kremlin propaganda.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: krummholz on September 06, 2021, 12:00:51 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on September 06, 2021, 10:28:14 AM
This is getting long and I maybe should try to regulate and limit my activity on this thread given the past problems. So, some short remarks:

Nobody suggests the US should neglect international terrorism, of course not, but it can be done without occupying a country for decades. Change of information is an effective way to stop terrorism: People can be arrested and stopped before they commit terrorist attacks. Also, the root causes of terrorism can be addressed.

You probably follow yourself some of the more reliable sources, but many Americans don't do that. For them it is Fox News/Tucker Carlson, not NPR. The lies are clever: Calling things 50/50 when they are 99/1. Making people doubt facts. Omitting information. You can do a lot of dishonest reporting without actually telling lies.

I'm not listening to Kremlin propaganda.

No worries with me, Poju. We obviously disagree, but it can be done respectfully. I'm not sure what difficulties you've encountered in the past, but I dislike ad hominems and I hope I have not said anything that you would take offense to.

Everything you have mentioned is an important element in fighting international terrorism, but they are apparently not enough. And I'm not sure how the US Govt. can address the root causes of terrorism. NGOs can, perhaps, to some extent, but what they have been able to do is clearly not enough. Terrorist organizations such as Daesh are committed to a world view 180 degrees opposed to that on which western democratic republics are based.

And yes, ok - I suppose Fox qualifies as part of the msm, and the only msm source that I wouldn't trust. I very rarely pay attention to what they say, they have long been in bed with Trump and are famous for spewing right-wing disinformation. The rest of the msm has, if anything, a left-wing bias. Even NPR is not politically neutral, but what they report as fact is usually reliable.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on September 06, 2021, 01:46:14 PM
Quote from: krummholz on September 06, 2021, 12:00:51 PM
No worries with me, Poju. We obviously disagree, but it can be done respectfully. I'm not sure what difficulties you've encountered in the past, but I dislike ad hominems and I hope I have not said anything that you would take offense to.

There is no problem with what you have said.  0:) The problem I have had is my behavior here has been seen as "trolling" (what it wasn't, but I can understand how my persistence on bringing up certain things might have given that impression). Last year I got a 2 months ban on this thread and this year for a few months all my post on this forum were approved before publication. Luckily that was lifted a while ago, but I need to be careful about what I say. That's why I am nervous about continuing this.

Quote from: krummholz on September 06, 2021, 12:00:51 PMEverything you have mentioned is an important element in fighting international terrorism, but they are apparently not enough. And I'm not sure how the US Govt. can address the root causes of terrorism. NGOs can, perhaps, to some extent, but what they have been able to do is clearly not enough. Terrorist organizations such as Daesh are committed to a world view 180 degrees opposed to that on which western democratic republics are based.

There is a lot to write about this, but I choose not to.

Quote from: krummholz on September 06, 2021, 12:00:51 PM
And yes, ok - I suppose Fox qualifies as part of the msm, and the only msm source that I wouldn't trust. I very rarely pay attention to what they say, they have long been in bed with Trump and are famous for spewing right-wing disinformation. The rest of the msm has, if anything, a left-wing bias. Even NPR is not politically neutral, but what they report as fact is usually reliable.

By definition msm means the media people follow the most and Fox News is among the most followed ones. MSM shouldn't be trusted much and we should be critical and be aware of the narratives. Hardly any portion of msm has a left-wing bias. People just think that e.g. MSNBC is left-wing, but that is only because the Overton Window has moves so right. A real left wing outlet speaks positively about medicare for all and critically about the current for profit system. It is also good to keep in mind, that someone can be liberal/lefty on social issues, but conservative on economic issues - or vice versa!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on September 06, 2021, 01:54:08 PM
You are still being watched, being conscious of it is a good thing. Don't feel as though you are the only one though, everyone who posts in this thread gets equal attention. In my personal opinion, your rhetoric seems to be much more within your control than it was 6-10 months ago. This is a very good thing. Carry on...  $:)

8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on September 06, 2021, 02:25:59 PM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on September 06, 2021, 01:54:08 PM
You are still being watched, being conscious of it is a good thing. Don't feel as though you are the only one though, everyone who posts in this thread gets equal attention. In my personal opinion, your rhetoric seems to be much more within your control than it was 6-10 months ago. This is a very good thing. Carry on...  $:)

8)

Thank you Gurn! It helps that I follow US politics these days much less religiously and I also try to concentrate more on my own life rather than problems on the other side of the planet. Also I understand nowadays better who I am (an INTJ/P) and who other people are. I understand better why people are different and think/sense/feel differently. That makes me more balanced which you apparently have noticed.  0:)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on September 06, 2021, 02:29:31 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on September 06, 2021, 02:25:59 PM
Thank you Gurn! It helps that I follow US politics these days much less religiously and I also try to concentrate more on my own life rather than problems on the other side of the planet. Also I understand nowadays better who I am (an INTJ/P) and who other people are. I understand better why people are different and think/sense/feel differently. That makes me more balanced which you apparently have noticed.  0:)

Very good.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Klavier on September 11, 2021, 05:36:10 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/BooFqPE.jpeg)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on September 12, 2021, 07:09:33 AM
Quote from: Klavier on September 11, 2021, 05:36:10 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/BooFqPE.jpeg)
No, no ... there's an obvious difference:  the Hezbollah guy has a beard.  :blank:
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on September 12, 2021, 11:26:09 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on September 12, 2021, 07:09:33 AM
No, no ... there's an obvious difference:  the Hezbollah guy has a beard.  :blank:

Also Hezbollah guy has more experience mismanaging a corrupt government.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on September 12, 2021, 11:58:24 AM
Quote from: JBS on September 12, 2021, 11:26:09 AM
Also Hezbollah guy has more experience mismanaging a corrupt government.

Indeed. Where the corrupt (former) Prez manages Lindsey.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Klavier on September 12, 2021, 04:03:53 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/KVnCTZq.jpeg)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on September 12, 2021, 10:38:54 PM
Quote from: Klavier on September 11, 2021, 05:36:10 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/BooFqPE.jpeg)

I found a link to the speech where Graham stated this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_4Ali-K4uk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_4Ali-K4uk)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on September 13, 2021, 07:35:28 AM
Quote from: Klavier on September 12, 2021, 04:03:53 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/KVnCTZq.jpeg)

Yeah so Trump just didn't want to offend his supporters:  most of them believe 9/11 was a "false flag".  ::)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on September 14, 2021, 09:19:08 AM
Just been listening to some stunning news on CNN regarding information/research in the new Woodward/Costa book titled Peril.  I'm in shock!  Gen. Milley held a secret meeting due to concerns that he felt that Trump might go rogue.  Too much to write about it here.  Really want to read this book.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/14/politics/woodward-book-trump-nuclear/index.html

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on September 14, 2021, 10:39:13 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on September 14, 2021, 09:19:08 AM
Just been listening to some stunning news on CNN regarding information/research in the new Woodward/Costa book titled Peril.  I'm in shock!  Gen. Milley held a secret meeting due to concerns that he felt that Trump might go rogue.  Too much to write about it here.  Really want to read this book.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/14/politics/woodward-book-trump-nuclear/index.html

PD

Of course, the horrible fact is, we're not yet out of the woods.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on September 14, 2021, 10:48:59 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 14, 2021, 10:39:13 AM
Of course, the horrible fact is, we're not yet out of the woods.
Yes, too true!  :(  Had you heard/read this news yet Karel?

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on September 14, 2021, 01:21:22 PM
Andrew Yang to start third party.

Without ranked-choice voting this will end up being pretty useless effort I'm afraid.  :P
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on September 14, 2021, 02:00:27 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on September 14, 2021, 01:21:22 PM
Andrew Yang to start third party.

Without ranked-choice voting this will end up being pretty useless effort I'm afraid.  :P

Yiou're right, at that.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on September 14, 2021, 02:01:17 PM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on September 14, 2021, 10:48:59 AM
Yes, too true!  :(  Had you heard/read this news yet Karel?

PD

Just saw a piece today.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on September 14, 2021, 04:22:35 PM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on September 14, 2021, 09:19:08 AM
Just been listening to some stunning news on CNN regarding information/research in the new Woodward/Costa book titled Peril.  I'm in shock!  Gen. Milley held a secret meeting due to concerns that he felt that Trump might go rogue.  Too much to write about it here.  Really want to read this book.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/14/politics/woodward-book-trump-nuclear/index.html

PD

Magaworld will say this confirms their "deep state" conspiracy theories and that it's "unconstitutional" to try to stop a madman from potentially launching a completely unjustified nuclear strike to distract from his election loss and declare a state of emergency.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on September 14, 2021, 04:57:21 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on September 14, 2021, 01:21:22 PM
Andrew Yang to start third party.

Without ranked-choice voting this will end up being pretty useless effort I'm afraid.  :P
Can't wait for leftists on Twitter to call it a fascist party if he refuses to play identity politics.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on September 15, 2021, 01:40:02 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 14, 2021, 02:00:27 PM
Yiou're right, at that.

Thanks for agreeing Karl.  ;)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on September 15, 2021, 03:05:19 AM
Quote from: greg on September 14, 2021, 04:57:21 PM
Can't wait for leftists on Twitter to call it a fascist party if he refuses to play identity politics.
I was disappointed that he did just that towards the end of his mayoral campaign. That surprised me. It was a pretty lame and desperate attempt at jumping on the victim train. I hope he recovers his integrity for this new political venture because I'd quite liked him.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on September 15, 2021, 03:47:53 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on September 14, 2021, 01:21:22 PM
Andrew Yang to start third party.

Without ranked-choice voting this will end up being pretty useless effort I'm afraid.  :P

Let me indulge in an aside re. rank-choice balloting.

Here in Canada a couple of elections ago the Liberal Partly leader, Justin Trudeau vowed that would be the last "first-past-the-post", (plurality wins), election.  After the election and a LP victory there was a multi-partisan Parliamentary committee appointed to look into the issue ...

As soon as it became apparent that the committee's consensus was leaning to proportional representation rather than ranked ballot, Trudeau shut committee down and shelved all consideration of electoral reform indefinitely.

You see, as the only centrist party the Liberal Party insiders deemed that ranked ballot would ensure LP majorities for decades to come -- whereas proportional representation would have a much different affect.  :o  Ranked ballot is merely an formalization of strategic voting.

Of course, Canadians can have as many as five significant parties on their ballot, much different than the USA where there is always only two significant parties' candidates.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on September 15, 2021, 06:38:18 AM
Quote from: milk on September 15, 2021, 03:05:19 AM
I was disappointed that he did just that towards the end of his mayoral campaign. That surprised me. It was a pretty lame and desperate attempt at jumping on the victim train. I hope he recovers his integrity for this new political venture because I'd quite liked him.

I heard he hired completely wrong people for his campaign and that's why it went down to toilet.

Quote from: Fëanor on September 15, 2021, 03:47:53 AM
Let me indulge in an aside re. rank-choice balloting.

Here in Canada a couple of elections ago the Liberal Partly leader, Justin Trudeau vowed that would be the last "first-past-the-post", (plurality wins), election.  After the election and a LP victory there was a multi-partisan Parliamentary committee appointed to look into the issue ...

As soon as it became apparent that the committee's consensus was leaning to proportional representation rather than ranked ballot, Trudeau shut committee down and shelved all consideration of electoral reform indefinitely.

You see, as the only centrist party the Liberal Party insiders deemed that ranked ballot would ensure LP majorities for decades to come -- whereas proportional representation would have a much different affect.  :o  Ranked ballot is merely an formalization of strategic voting.

Of course, Canadians can have as many as five significant parties on their ballot, much different than the USA where there is always only two significant parties' candidates.

Yes, the US being so strongly two party system makes the difference.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on September 16, 2021, 12:25:32 PM
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/09/16/trump-supports-jan-6-riot-defendants-police-brace-for-capitol-rally.html
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on September 17, 2021, 05:28:47 AM
Quote from: T. D. on September 16, 2021, 12:25:32 PM
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/09/16/trump-supports-jan-6-riot-defendants-police-brace-for-capitol-rally.html
>:(  With all of the crazy stuff going on in the world--including Covid--we have to waste money, officers and other resources and also pray that no one gets hurt!

Found this (by accident when googling about the protest) on Yahoo:

"WASHINGTON – Organizers of a Saturday rally supporting defendants charged in the Capitol riot Jan. 6 are urging participants not to wear clothing or carry signs supporting former President Donald Trump or President Joe Biden.

Matt Braynard, the former Trump campaign staffer who organized the rally, said participants who supported the political figures would be considered infiltrators.

'We request that anybody attending our events not wear any clothing or have signs supportive of either President Trump or Biden," Braynard said in a tweet. "Anyone not honoring this request will be assumed to be an infiltrator and we will take your picture, find out who you are, and make you famous.'"


So, is this person, Matt Braynard, really the organizer of the rally?  It looks like it....

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on September 17, 2021, 07:35:03 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on September 17, 2021, 05:28:47 AM
>:(  With all of the crazy stuff going on in the world--including Covid--we have to waste money, officers and other resources and also pray that no one gets hurt!

Found this (by accident when googling about the protest) on Yahoo:

"WASHINGTON – Organizers of a Saturday rally supporting defendants charged in the Capitol riot Jan. 6 are urging participants not to wear clothing or carry signs supporting former President Donald Trump or President Joe Biden.

Matt Braynard, the former Trump campaign staffer who organized the rally, said participants who supported the political figures would be considered infiltrators.

'We request that anybody attending our events not wear any clothing or have signs supportive of either President Trump or Biden," Braynard said in a tweet. "Anyone not honoring this request will be assumed to be an infiltrator and we will take your picture, find out who you are, and make you famous.'"


So, is this person, Matt Braynard, really the organizer of the rally?  It looks like it....

PD

Don't care enough to investigate. And you'd get into the question of figurehead vs. "real" organizer.

Apparently the cognoscenti feel this is a "false flag" operation and intend to give it a miss  :o :-X: https://www.yahoo.com/now/paranoia-accusations-cloud-efforts-launch-191150555.html
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on September 18, 2021, 02:07:40 PM
Quote from: T. D. on September 17, 2021, 07:35:03 AM
Don't care enough to investigate. And you'd get into the question of figurehead vs. "real" organizer.

Apparently the cognoscenti feel this is a "false flag" operation and intend to give it a miss  :o :-X: https://www.yahoo.com/now/paranoia-accusations-cloud-efforts-launch-191150555.html
Interesting.  I was just reading a short time ago that folks were scared/concerned about attending.  In any event, what I've been reading is that it's basically been a non-event.  Only several hundred attended with notable absences by any current politicians and anyone from Trump's family/former admin/aides including Trump himself.  Interesting about some of the excuses, like one by Matt Gaetz who said that he had already promised to spend time with his wife that day.

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on October 13, 2021, 10:44:02 AM
Greg Sargent of the WaPo:

"The right wing in this country, particularly under Donald Trump, has pulled off a spectacular trick. It has persuaded many neutral observers that its chronic anti-democratic bad acting is a natural and inevitable background feature of our politics that is properly seen as beyond accountability, and that forbearance in response is the price for future democratic stability.

"This is why the coming battle over Trump cronies who are likely to defy the Jan. 6 select committee's subpoenas is so important. At stake is not just whether we'll achieve basic accountability for a sustained effort to overturn U.S. democracy.

"Also at stake is whether our system can uphold the rule of law in the face of a concerted campaign to cow good faith actors into accepting that the price of peace is special treatment that places bad actors above the law.

"CNN reports that the select committee is likely to refer any Trump advisers and allies who defy subpoenas to the Justice Department for prosecution. As of now, one — Stephen K. Bannon — is not cooperating. What former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows and political adviser Dan Scavino will do remains unclear.

"If they have not indicated cooperation by the deposition deadlines of Oct. 14 and Oct. 15, the next step should be to refer the matter for Justice Department prosecution. But as CNN reports, it's unclear what would happen then:

Holding non-compliant witnesses in criminal contempt would take the Justice Department agreeing to prosecute those individuals in federal court — a matter that Attorney General Merrick Garland has not weighed in on publicly to date or indicated if he would support.

"In an interview, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), a member of the select committee, weighed in strongly behind the idea that the Justice Department should act aggressively.

"Given the nature of the congressional investigation, the Department of Justice would have every reason to enforce criminal contempt referrals from Congress," Raskin told me. "This is about protecting the democracy against violent insurrections and coups."

The straightforward case for this is that it's essential to upholding the rule of law. As Raskin pointed out, the core dictum that no one is above the law is plainly at stake.

"People are held in criminal contempt all of the time, all over the country, for disobeying subpoenas and not showing up in court," Raskin said. "There's nothing remotely unusual about it."

In other words, this is something we should expect as a matter of due course, not something we should see as an extraordinary step that violates settled understandings.

We do not know how the Justice Department will react to criminal referrals. But in other situations, senior department officials have indicated a reluctance to be perceived as acting politically by re-litigating past battles over Trump, seeing this as a threat to the restoration of normalcy.

In this case, we should be particularly wary of such a mind-set.

That's because Trump and his GOP allies have sought to construct a barrier of immunity for their crimes against democracy and their assaults on civil order by casting efforts at accountability themselves as the real threat to future civil peace.

When Trump faced impeachment for inciting the mob to violently disrupt his election loss, he hinted more violence might result, posing a "tremendous danger to our country." His congressional allies fake-worried that such accountability might "incite further violence" or prevent the "healing of this great nation."

Separately, the House GOP leadership has openly threatened retribution against private companies that honor the Jan. 6 committee's lawful subpoenas. Again and again, in one way or another, Trump-allied Republicans have tacitly or overtly insisted that immunity from accountability is the price for national stability and future well being.

This sort of thing also games our discourse. It ends up portraying efforts at accountability as themselves representing disruptive norm-violations. This effectively reduces GOP bad faith and bad acting to a natural background feature of our politics, and recasts acting against it, or even efforts at communicating basic truths about it, as the real departure from normality.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on October 13, 2021, 12:20:30 PM
Opinion: Pessimism about the Jan. 6 committee is unwarranted

Opinion by Jennifer Rubin

The punditocracy has repeatedly underestimated the House select committee on the Jan. 6 attempted coup.

When Republicans filibustered the formation of an independent commission to examine the monstrous act of domestic terrorism, many in the media chose to engage in a horse-race analysis (Pelosi loses! Republicans remain in Trump's corner!), rather than focusing of the utter abdication of responsibility by Republicans, many of whom hyped the "big lie" about a stolen election.

When House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) decided to reject two of the Republicans nominated for the select committee for having publicly denounced the role of the committee and fanning MAGA conspiracy theories, the pundits shook their heads. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), they insisted, had outplayed her. (Look how angry Republicans are! The committee will look too partisan!)

Instead, Pelosi brought on two of the rare Republican House members who have not lost their spines or their minds. Reps. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) and Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.) not only made the committee bipartisan but also added gravitas and credibility to the undertaking.

Well, no one will care much what the committee will do, some in the chattering class sniffed. And what's the point of bringing in police officers to testify as to what occurred on Jan. 6?

In fact, the officers' testimony was mesmerizing and stunning, reminding us of the mob's thuggishness, racism and contempt for democracy.

Next came the subpoenas for four of former president Donald Trump's associates and to those who may have helped organize the event. When Stephen K. Bannon raised an utterly bogus claim of executive privilege (which was not available to him in part because he was not a government employee at the time and because President Biden, not Trump, controls the privilege) more in the mainstream media threw up their hands. They'll never have the nerve to enforce it! The Trump side will run out the clock!

Wrong, and wrong. The committee is unanimous in demanding enforcement of the subpoenas. Cheney told reporters Tuesday, "In general, people are going to have to appear, or ... we will move contempt charges against them." This follows comments from other members including Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif), who declared in an appearance on CNN: "I think we are completely of one mind that if people refuse to respond to questions, refuse to produce documents without justification, that we will hold them in criminal contempt and refer them to the Justice Department."

Unlike the Trump Justice Department, which collaborated with the then-president's obstruction of investigations, the Biden Justice Department almost certainly will move to enforce the contempt citations swiftly. And for those expecting this to drag on or the Supreme Court to ride to Trump's rescue, let's remember that even the right-wing Supreme Court has upheld Congress's right to gather information despite regal claims of privilege.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., writing for the majority, found in Trump v. Vance that even a sitting president could not enjoy immunity from subpoenas: "Two hundred years ago, a great jurist of our Court established that no citizen, not even the President, is categorically above the common duty to produce evidence when called upon in a criminal proceeding. We reaffirm that principle today and hold that the President is neither absolutely immune from state criminal subpoenas seeking his private papers nor entitled to a heightened standard of need." If a sitting president is not immune, the underlings of a former president surely are not.

Should Bannon decide to resist, the matter should get quickly resolved. Unlike the right-wing U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit that played along with Texas's abortion bounty advocates, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit likely will not allow gamesmanship to override the Constitution. Could Bannon show up and take the Fifth? Sure, but the idea of a former consigliere of Trump claiming he might implicate himself criminally would be a nightmare for the "nothing to see here, just move along" crowd.

The Biden administration, as we saw with documents and witness testimony made available to the Senate Judiciary Committee, is going to cooperate to the greatest extent possible with the committee. Congress will get phone records, witness testimony and other compelling evidence.

The committee is already circling around at least one right-wing congressman who may have played a role in the attempted coup. The Senate report, which the Jan. 6 House committee now has in hand, details the interaction between Trump officials and Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.) in Trump's failed effort to get the Justice Department to help invalidate the election (including the effort to oust the acting attorney general). Perry will certainly be a witness. He is precisely the sort of person who might be interested in "flipping" to provide further evidence about higher-ups' wrongdoing.

In short, no one should underestimate the effectiveness of the Jan. 6 committee. It has already exceeded meager expectations and will, I am confident, turn over more stones. What it finds will probably deepen our understanding of Trump's determination to pull off a coup and the involvement of his cronies.

In doing so, the committee should enable Americans to grasp the extreme peril the country would face should those involved not be held legally accountable. And it might even prompt a couple Senate Democrats to break through the filibuster to ensure that a future presidential candidate does not try to pull off a similar scheme to undermine elections.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on October 13, 2021, 10:59:22 PM
Thanks for making these WaPo pieces accessible.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on October 14, 2021, 08:32:08 AM
Quote from: Herman on October 13, 2021, 10:59:22 PM
Thanks for making these WaPo pieces accessible.

+1
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on October 14, 2021, 12:30:37 PM
Chris Truax: "Trump's claims of executive privilege were often absurd when he was president. Being an ex-president has not improved them. Nonetheless, until they are directly challenged and excised, they remain a festering carbuncle disfiguring the rule of law and our constitutional system. Maybe the first step in cleaning up Trump's mess will be establishing once and for all that executive privilege is a tool of good government rather than a shield for bad behavior."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on October 14, 2021, 01:53:51 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 14, 2021, 12:30:37 PM
Chris Truax: "Trump's claims of executive privilege were often absurd when he was president. Being an ex-president has not improved them. Nonetheless, until they are directly challenged and excised, they remain a festering carbuncle disfiguring the rule of law and our constitutional system. Maybe the first step in cleaning up Trump's mess will be establishing once and for all that executive privilege is a tool of good government rather than a shield for bad behavior."

I'd settle for establishing that executive privilege is a privilege of the executive.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on October 14, 2021, 10:49:57 PM
What climate change and sea level rise will do to American cities


..The space center in Houston surrounded by a moat; the famous beach in Santa Monica, Calif., completely submerged; a former sports stadium in Washington, D.C., turned into a bathtub — these are just some of the startling images of the future in America's largest cities without action to limit climate change, according to new research by Climate Central, a research and communications nonprofit...

...Because of greenhouse gas emissions from burning fossil fuels, average global temperatures have already risen 1.2° Celsius (2.2° Fahrenheit) above the preindustrial era, but as glaciers and polar ice caps melt, there is a decades-long lag for sea level rise. So a team of researchers from Climate Central projected how much the waters will rise if the world reaches only 1.5°C of warming, which is the goal world leaders set forth in the 2015 Paris climate agreement...

...But even limiting temperature rise to 1.5°C will result in flooding in and around some key sites. Santa Monica, for example, will lose its beach at 1.5°C of warming, once sea level rise has caught up. The projections also show how much more the tide will rise in the heart of some of the world's largest cities and most famous sites if that warming is doubled, which will happen within 100 years if nations take no action to combat climate change...

https://news.yahoo.com/what-climate-change-and-sea-level-rise-will-do-to-american-cities-182832731.html (https://news.yahoo.com/what-climate-change-and-sea-level-rise-will-do-to-american-cities-182832731.html)


The United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has published the first part of its sixth assessment report (AR6), which will form the cornerstone of climate science for the years ahead.

"For global climate indicators, evidence for abrupt change is limited, but deep ocean warming, acidification and sea level rise are committed to ongoing change for millennia after global surface temperatures initially stabilise and are irreversible on human time scales (very high confidence)."


https://www.carbonbrief.org/in-depth-qa-the-ipccs-sixth-assessment-report-on-climate-science
(https://www.carbonbrief.org/in-depth-qa-the-ipccs-sixth-assessment-report-on-climate-science)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on October 19, 2021, 10:45:24 AM
Opinion: Biden did not run to stage a revolution. Progressives should stop demanding one.

Opinion by the [Washington Post] Editorial Board

For a moment, progressives seemed to have a dream opportunity to imprint their vision on the country. Democrats in March muscled through a big covid-19 relief bill on a party-line vote. The party seemed unified enough to leverage its thin majorities, as senior lawmakers prepared infrastructure and social spending bills that would cost trillions.

These dreams were never realistic, and they are now evaporating. But many progressives are having trouble accepting this, looking for gimmicky ways to enact broad structural change despite centrists' objections.

To address the demands of key moderates, Democrats must cut back their big social spending bill from $3.5 trillion to $2 trillion or less. While all seem to agree that there is no way around slashing the price tag for Sens. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.), they disagree on how to do it. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) sent a letter to lawmakers last week arguing that Democrats should "do fewer things well." House progressives responded with a letter arguing that Democrats should not cut programs but merely fund all of them for a shorter period of time. "This is our moment to make the President's vision a reality," the letter read. "This bill offers us a chance to fundamentally transform the relationship between the American people and their government."

But that is not what President Biden promised when he ran for president. Mr. Biden handily beat the left's candidate, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), in the Democratic primaries, arguing that one need not stage a revolution to do good. He spoke about returning normalcy and competence to Washington, not renegotiating the social contract.

To be sure, Mr. Biden emphasized certain policy goals, particularly addressing climate change. Democrats still have a chance to make concrete progress on climate, family, health and education issues — if they set aside grandiose ideological ambitions and prioritize. They do not need to expand Medicare for seniors who already have ample benefits; shoring up the Affordable Care Act for Americans of working age is a higher priority. They do not have to provide universal free community college when enhanced Pell Grants can pay the neediest Americans' tuition bills. They can put stricter income limits on the child tax credit, ensuring that it still cuts child poverty without wasting taxpayer money on higher-income people.

Progressives' plan to fund everything for fewer years would risk the sudden expiration of social programs in a relative heartbeat. To the extent progressives believe that future Congresses would extend those benefits, they favor budget cheating, making it seem as though their agenda is relatively inexpensive when the low price-tag simply reflects an unusually short spending window. If Democrats used 10 years of new revenue to finance five years of new spending, that would compound the misrepresentation.

This does not mean Democrats should settle for little. If the 2020 election was not a vote for revolution, neither was it an endorsement of stasis. Mr. Biden promised that a return to normalcy would produce tangible results. Mr. Manchin's reported opposition to acting ambitiously on climate change could torpedo a key element of Mr. Biden's campaign — and deal untold harm to future generations.

The health of Americans and their climate depends on Democrats passing well-designed, durable programs on which people and businesses can rely. Both sides of the party must keep this in mind as the Democrats pare their legislative ambitions.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on October 19, 2021, 12:58:30 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 19, 2021, 10:45:24 AM
Opinion: Biden did not run to stage a revolution. Progressives should stop demanding one.

Opinion by the [Washington Post] Editorial Board

For a moment, progressives seemed to have a dream opportunity to imprint their vision on the country. Democrats in March muscled through a big covid-19 relief bill on a party-line vote. The party seemed unified enough to leverage its thin majorities, as senior lawmakers prepared infrastructure and social spending bills that would cost trillions.

These dreams were never realistic, and they are now evaporating. But many progressives are having trouble accepting this, looking for gimmicky ways to enact broad structural change despite centrists' objections.

To address the demands of key moderates, Democrats must cut back their big social spending bill from $3.5 trillion to $2 trillion or less. While all seem to agree that there is no way around slashing the price tag for Sens. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.), they disagree on how to do it. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) sent a letter to lawmakers last week arguing that Democrats should "do fewer things well." House progressives responded with a letter arguing that Democrats should not cut programs but merely fund all of them for a shorter period of time. "This is our moment to make the President's vision a reality," the letter read. "This bill offers us a chance to fundamentally transform the relationship between the American people and their government."

But that is not what President Biden promised when he ran for president. Mr. Biden handily beat the left's candidate, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), in the Democratic primaries, arguing that one need not stage a revolution to do good. He spoke about returning normalcy and competence to Washington, not renegotiating the social contract.

To be sure, Mr. Biden emphasized certain policy goals, particularly addressing climate change. Democrats still have a chance to make concrete progress on climate, family, health and education issues — if they set aside grandiose ideological ambitions and prioritize. They do not need to expand Medicare for seniors who already have ample benefits; shoring up the Affordable Care Act for Americans of working age is a higher priority. They do not have to provide universal free community college when enhanced Pell Grants can pay the neediest Americans' tuition bills. They can put stricter income limits on the child tax credit, ensuring that it still cuts child poverty without wasting taxpayer money on higher-income people.

Progressives' plan to fund everything for fewer years would risk the sudden expiration of social programs in a relative heartbeat. To the extent progressives believe that future Congresses would extend those benefits, they favor budget cheating, making it seem as though their agenda is relatively inexpensive when the low price-tag simply reflects an unusually short spending window. If Democrats used 10 years of new revenue to finance five years of new spending, that would compound the misrepresentation.

This does not mean Democrats should settle for little. If the 2020 election was not a vote for revolution, neither was it an endorsement of stasis. Mr. Biden promised that a return to normalcy would produce tangible results. Mr. Manchin's reported opposition to acting ambitiously on climate change could torpedo a key element of Mr. Biden's campaign — and deal untold harm to future generations.

The health of Americans and their climate depends on Democrats passing well-designed, durable programs on which people and businesses can rely. Both sides of the party must keep this in mind as the Democrats pare their legislative ambitions.

This sort of crap wouldn't happen in a parliamentary democracy -- let's get that straight.  But Americans, of course, don't live in a democracy, not really, and things are getting worse for them.

The USA seriously needs most of the things the progressives want and the nation could afford it if the Rich and upper middle class paid a share that reflected the benefit they derive from living in America.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 19, 2021, 01:03:20 PM
My opinion about this WP opinion:

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 19, 2021, 10:45:24 AM
Opinion: Biden did not run to stage a revolution. Progressives should stop demanding one.

Why? What should the progressives do instead? Campaign for the status quo like the corporatists? The progressives didn't want Biden into the White House to begin with. They wanted Bernie Sanders. So, why are they supposed to just accept the lack of lefty agenda by Biden? Progressives were voted into the office to fight for regular people and that's what they should be doing. Demanding a "revolution" is just that.

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 19, 2021, 10:45:24 AMOpinion by the [Washington Post] Editorial Board

For a moment, progressives seemed to have a dream opportunity to imprint their vision on the country. Democrats in March muscled through a big covid-19 relief bill on a party-line vote. The party seemed unified enough to leverage its thin majorities, as senior lawmakers prepared infrastructure and social spending bills that would cost trillions.

These dreams were never realistic, and they are now evaporating. But many progressives are having trouble accepting this, looking for gimmicky ways to enact broad structural change despite centrists' objections.[/QUOTE]

Wars costing trillions are somehow realistic. Wall Street bailouts costing trillions are somehow realistic. Now that it is about improving the lives of regular Americans, it is not realistic. Why? Because of oligarchy. The  $3.5 trillion proposal is very popular among Americans. Vast majority support it. It is the centrist opinion. Those who oppose it represent right wing extremist oligarchic ideology in which the people of the richest country in the World should not have the "nice things" people in other developped countries have.

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 19, 2021, 10:45:24 AMTo address the demands of key moderates, Democrats must cut back their big social spending bill from $3.5 trillion to $2 trillion or less. While all seem to agree that there is no way around slashing the price tag for Sens. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.), they disagree on how to do it. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) sent a letter to lawmakers last week arguing that Democrats should "do fewer things well." House progressives responded with a letter arguing that Democrats should not cut programs but merely fund all of them for a shorter period of time. "This is our moment to make the President's vision a reality," the letter read. "This bill offers us a chance to fundamentally transform the relationship between the American people and their government."

The bill should have been AT LEAST 6 trillion. The 3.5 trillion bill is already a massive compromise. Manchin and Sinema are unwilling to say clearly what they want cut from the bill, because they know pretty much EVERYTHING in it is massively popular. Manchin doesn't like the green energy stuff, because he gets half a million a year from coal. Sinema knows that and these two EXTREMELY CORRUPT ASSHOLES can play the game enriching themselves while ruining the future of the country and possibly the whole planet.

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 19, 2021, 10:45:24 AMBut that is not what President Biden promised when he ran for president. Mr. Biden handily beat the left's candidate, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), in the Democratic primaries, arguing that one need not stage a revolution to do good. He spoke about returning normalcy and competence to Washington, not renegotiating the social contract.
Who cares what Biden promised? The lefties can use their political leverage to get their political agenda done as much as possible. Biden beat Bernie Sanders because of the massive support from corporote media (MOST ELECTABLE!!! BERNIE IS CRAZY COMMUNISTS!!! ) and the fuckery in DNC to stop Bernie. Bernie would be the president if the damn country wasn't an oligarchy and the media was reasonable in the way it frames politics. Yes, in oligarchy revolution is needed. Otherwise the top 1 % won't give in one inch. The social contract is ruined.

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 19, 2021, 10:45:24 AMTo be sure, Mr. Biden emphasized certain policy goals, particularly addressing climate change. Democrats still have a chance to make concrete progress on climate, family, health and education issues — if they set aside grandiose ideological ambitions and prioritize. They do not need to expand Medicare for seniors who already have ample benefits; shoring up the Affordable Care Act for Americans of working age is a higher priority. They do not have to provide universal free community college when enhanced Pell Grants can pay the neediest Americans' tuition bills. They can put stricter income limits on the child tax credit, ensuring that it still cuts child poverty without wasting taxpayer money on higher-income people.

Oh yeah, do not tax the rich!! Don't give anything to the poor! fucking WP! Who believes this shit? Dont expand medicare?? But people WANT that!!! Hello! Big pharma likes this.

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 19, 2021, 10:45:24 AMProgressives' plan to fund everything for fewer years would risk the sudden expiration of social programs in a relative heartbeat. To the extent progressives believe that future Congresses would extend those benefits, they favor budget cheating, making it seem as though their agenda is relatively inexpensive when the low price-tag simply reflects an unusually short spending window. If Democrats used 10 years of new revenue to finance five years of new spending, that would compound the misrepresentation.

Yeah, there is ALWAYS problems with what progressives want. OTHER western countries have figured these things out! But then again other countries aren't completely corrupt oligarchies where the rich own most politicians.

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 19, 2021, 10:45:24 AMThis does not mean Democrats should settle for little. If the 2020 election was not a vote for revolution, neither was it an endorsement of stasis. Mr. Biden promised that a return to normalcy would produce tangible results. Mr. Manchin's reported opposition to acting ambitiously on climate change could torpedo a key element of Mr. Biden's campaign — and deal untold harm to future generations.

Yes. Dems need to get shit done before the 2022 election. Biden needs to tell Manching and Sinema that if they don't support the 3.5 trillion bill he will campaign to ruin their careers and if they do support it they can have some nice things for their states, whatever they want.

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 19, 2021, 10:45:24 AMThe health of Americans and their climate depends on Democrats passing well-designed, durable programs on which people and businesses can rely. Both sides of the party must keep this in mind as the Democrats pare their legislative ambitions.

Yeah, so why all this talk about progressives and their unrealisistic demands?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on October 19, 2021, 01:40:30 PM
You may not be happy with the idea of centrism, Poju, but again, Biden won the election because he was not as left as Bernie. A crucial element in Biden's victory was Republicans/Conservatives who abhor Trump. If these people support Biden in spite of not agreeing with him 100% the Progressives ought to manage to be equally adult and realistic, as well.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 19, 2021, 03:12:55 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 19, 2021, 01:40:30 PM
You may not be happy with the idea of centrism, Poju, but again, Biden won the election because he was not as left as Bernie. A crucial element in Biden's victory was Republicans/Conservatives who abhor Trump. If these people support Biden in spite of not agreeing with him 100% the Progressives ought to manage to be equally adult and realistic, as well.

No Karl. Biden won (the primary) because of the "most electable" narrative of corporate media + some other things such as "Obama years nostalgia" and the orchestration of corporate candidates going behind Biden at the critical moment. Even Elizabeth Warren stabbed Bernie in the back in her delusional hopes for becoming Biden's VP pick. It was rigged against Bernie from the beginning: Buttigieg* was made the victor of Iowa despite of the race being close (plus things behind the scenes that corporate media didn't talk about) to have the narrative of Bernie being a loser. People wanted rid of Trump so they wanted a winner and despite of agreeing with Bernie the most politically the played safe and went behind the "safe" options regurgitated in media. I followed all of this very closely at the time and it was very frustrating to see so many here so clueless of how the primary went. The DNC practically stopped Bernie two times from becoming the president to protect the oligarchy. It is a massive loss for regular Americans, but hey, why do I care? I have** the nice things millions of Americans can only dream about. My mistake was being so slow to understand the US is not a first world country. It is just a large, very rich and militarily powerful third world country pretending to be a beacon of democracy and freedom what it might have been in the past, but is far from that anymore. The US was a really great country in the WWII and with the Marshall program helping Europe get on its feet and making them allies. In the 50's and 60's the US had prosperous middle class and strong unions, but then things started going wrong and from the late 70's it has been downhill. As a society the US has become very unstable and divided. The corporate media has lied to the people for decades driving a lot of people insane not knowing who they can trust. So they trust "outsiders" like Trump.

Biden got 7 million more votes, but it could have gone for Trump. It was a close call. Covid-19 helped Biden because it exposed to the incompetence of Trump to some voters.

Washington Post does have good articles, but when it comes to defending the oligarchs, it shouldn't be unclear whose side they take. It is corporate media outlet owned by oligarchs. They will take lefty position only when it is convenient such as in symbolic issues. They might be "progressive" on social issues (gay marriage, racism, gender equality etc.) but they are not progressive on economic issues. That's why they call the demands of the progressives unrealistic. Understanding this isn't rocket science. Maybe people are just unwilling to admit the media they have trusted all they lives aren't as trustworthy as they have believed. Cognitive dissonance?

* In the beginning the establishment wasn't so firmly behind Biden. Any corporate candidate would have been good for them such as Pete Buttigieg. The most important thing was to stop Bernie. For the establishment even a second term for Trump would have been better than Bernie as the president, because Bernie would have been the president of the bottom 99 %, not the top 1 %.

** Well, buying Reese's Peanut Butter Cups in Finland is difficult and if they are sold somewhere the price is 3 times what they cost in the US. That's one of the only things I envy Americans for.  :P

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on October 19, 2021, 03:20:05 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 19, 2021, 03:12:55 PM
No Karl. Biden won (the primary) because of the "most electable" narrative of corporate media + some other things such as "Obama years nostalgia" and the orchestration of corporate candidates going behind Biden at the critical moment. Even Elizabeth Warren stabbed Bernie in the back in her delusional hopes for becoming Biden's VP pick. It was rigged against Bernie from the beginning: Buttigieg* was made the victor of Iowa despite of the race being close (plus things behind the scenes that corporate media didn't talk about) to have the narrative of Bernie being a loser. People wanted rid of Trump so they wanted a winner and despite of agreeing with Bernie the most politically the played safe and went behind the "safe" options regurgitated in media. I followed all of this very closely at the time and it was very frustrating to see so many here so clueless of how the primary went. The DNC practically stopped Bernie two times from becoming the president to protect the oligarchy. It is a massive loss for regular Americans, but hey, why do I care? I have** the nice things millions of Americans can only dream about. My mistake was being so slow to understand the US is not a first world country. It is just a large, very rich and militarily powerful third world country pretending to be a beacon of democracy and freedom what it might have been in the past, but is far from that anymore. The US was a really great country in the WWII and with the Marshall program helping Europe get on its feet and making them allies. In the 50's and 60's the US had prosperous middle class and strong unions, but then things started going wrong and from the late 70's it has been downhill. As a society the US has become very unstable and divided. The corporate media has lied to the people for decades driving a lot of people insane not knowing who they can trust. So they trust "outsiders" like Trump.

Biden got 7 million more votes, but it could have gone for Trump. It was a close call. Covid-19 helped Biden because it exposed to the incompetence of Trump to some voters.

Washington Post does have good articles, but when it comes to defending the oligarchs, it shouldn't be unclear whose side they take. It is corporate media outlet owned by oligarchs. They will take lefty position only when it is convenient such as in symbolic issues. They might be "progressive" on social issues (gay marriage, racism, gender equality etc.) but they are not progressive on economic issues. That's why they call the demands of the progressives unrealistic. Understanding this isn't rocket science. Maybe people are just unwilling to admit the media they have trusted all they lives aren't as trustworthy as they have believed. Cognitive dissonance?

* In the beginning the establishment wasn't so firmly behind Biden. Any corporate candidate would have been good for them such as Pete Buttigieg. The most important thing was to stop Bernie. For the establishment even a second term for Trump would have been better than Bernie as the president, because Bernie would have been the president of the bottom 99 %, not the top 1 %.

** Well, buying Reese's Peanut Butter Cups in Finland is difficult and if they are sold somewhere the price is 3 times what they cost in the US. That's one of the only things I envy Americans for.  :P



Suffice it to say that I disagree on many points.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 19, 2021, 03:30:19 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 19, 2021, 03:20:05 PM
Suffice it to say that I disagree on many points.

Explain why you disagree. It is good to explain your beliefs to other people, because you can "test" your believes that way. I want my beliefs to hold water. If I notice that's not the case I need to adjust my beliefs.

The demands of progressives might sadly be politically unrealistic (maybe because the progressives don't know how to play hardball and use leverage), but those demands are not fiscally unrealistic.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on October 19, 2021, 04:34:05 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 19, 2021, 03:30:19 PM
Explain why you disagree. It is good to explain your beliefs to other people, because you can "test" your believes that way. I want my beliefs to hold water. If I notice that's not the case I need to adjust my beliefs.


A variety of people have been - patiently or otherwise - explaining their positions and their reasons for disagreement to you for years now from a variety of angles and a variety of different political positions. You've never challenged your own thinking when they do so, you just get angry and double down. It would be nice for once to hear you say "I hadn't considered that before - looking at it now I think you might be right", but it hasn't happened yet.

Instead of asking people to make their case again and expect a different result why not go back over previous arguments on this thread and the one before it and ask yourself if you really were listening, if you really were trying to challenge your own ideas, or if it just reads as though you really do think you have all the answers and know every issue perfectly?

Don't reply: go back and read.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on October 19, 2021, 04:54:03 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on October 19, 2021, 04:34:05 PM
A variety of people have been - patiently or otherwise - explaining their positions and their reasons for disagreement to you for years now from a variety of angles and a variety of different political positions. You've never challenged your own thinking when they do so, you just get angry and double down. It would be nice for once to hear you say "I hadn't considered that before - looking at it now I think you might be right", but it hasn't happened yet.

Instead of asking people to make their case again and expect a different result why not go back over previous arguments on this thread and the one before it and ask yourself if you really were listening, if you really were trying to challenge your own ideas, or if it just reads as though you really do think you have all the answers and know every issue perfectly?

Don't reply: go back and read.
I know there's a long history with 71 on this kind of exchange but I don't see the need to keep dragging it up. Maybe I'm missing something but people seem to constantly beat up on 71. I understand there's some conflict or controversy from the past but it seems way past. I read this post regularly and I don't think I've seen 71 be unreasonable or rude in the last year at least. 71 can ask. If Karl doesn't want to, he doesn't have to. I don't think it's recommended on any post here, about politics or music, to say "don't ask that, it's been answered." There's always room for better answers or more discussion. Unless the question is so basic and simple which this isn't.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 19, 2021, 05:00:58 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on October 19, 2021, 04:34:05 PM
Don't reply: go back and read.

I go to sleep.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on October 19, 2021, 05:09:47 PM
Quote from: milk on October 19, 2021, 04:54:03 PM
I know there's a long history with 71 on this kind of exchange but I don't see the need to keep dragging it up. Maybe I'm missing something but people seem to constantly beat up on 71. I understand there's some conflict or controversy from the past but it seems way past. I read this post regularly and I don't think I've seen 71 be unreasonable or rude in the last year at least. 71 can ask. If Karl doesn't want to, he doesn't have to. I don't think it's recommended on any post here, about politics or music, to say "don't ask that, it's been answered." There's always room for better answers or more discussion. Unless the question is so basic and simple which this isn't.

Fair enough. I wasn't trying to start something but stop something that has proved utterly unfruitful many times over.

The musical analogy I might use, imperfect as it is, would be with posters who wont accept any classical after, say, 1945, and dismiss sit all as "the emperors new cloths", and refuse to budge to the point of calling everyone who does appreciate it as deluded or brainwashed (happily a rarity here, but there was no shortage at TC). There is every bit the sense in those situations that one more conversation is not going help and one might as well just say "don't ask that, it's been answered."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on October 19, 2021, 05:20:35 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 19, 2021, 03:30:19 PM
[snip] but those demands are not fiscally unrealistic.

On that point I agree completely.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 20, 2021, 02:43:22 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on October 19, 2021, 04:34:05 PM
A variety of people have been - patiently or otherwise - explaining their positions and their reasons for disagreement to you for years now from a variety of angles and a variety of different political positions. You've never challenged your own thinking when they do so, you just get angry and double down. It would be nice for once to hear you say "I hadn't considered that before - looking at it now I think you might be right", but it hasn't happened yet.

Instead of asking people to make their case again and expect a different result why not go back over previous arguments on this thread and the one before it and ask yourself if you really were listening, if you really were trying to challenge your own ideas, or if it just reads as though you really do think you have all the answers and know every issue perfectly?

Don't reply: go back and read.

Good morning! (or whatever the time is for you).

Yes, people have explained their positions, but that doesn't mean I instantly change my own opinions accordingly. I am willing to change my views when convincing arguments are given. It is not my fault if people aren't able to give convincing enough arguments.

Here is something I have changed my views about a little bit: The forcethevote thing almost a year ago and the massive feud between TYT and Jimmy Door has made me much more careful and critical with these outlets. At first it looked as if TYT were frauds and Jimmy Door is the one to be trusted, but lately I trust TYT more and Jimmy Doors seems to have evolved into a total fraud talking about ivermectin and what not. I haven't even listened to him for a while.  Meanwhile what TYT does these days looks trustworthy, but I am critical. So many "good guys" have turned into nonsense regurtating grifters. This doesn't mean I trust American corporate media more. They have been horrible for decades and still are. I trust Kyle Kulinski and David Pakman the most, but I am critical.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 20, 2021, 02:54:28 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 19, 2021, 05:20:35 PM
On that point I agree completely.

Our disagreements are possibly much smaller than we think. Our disagreement might be more of semantic kind ("what does unrealistic mean?") than politic.

Something can be unrealistic in the short term, but realistic in the long term. Just 20 years ago it looked unrealistic most Dems (politicians) would support gay marriage, but that changed fast when things started to happen. It is domino effect and it turns unrealistic things realistic. Someone just has to have the courage and strength to push the first domino. Progressives are domino pushers, or at least they should be.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on October 20, 2021, 03:57:17 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 19, 2021, 03:12:55 PM
...
The DNC practically stopped Bernie two times from becoming the president to protect the oligarchy. It is a massive loss for regular Americans, but hey, why do I care? I have** the nice things millions of Americans can only dream about. My mistake was being so slow to understand the US is not a first world country. It is just a large, very rich and militarily powerful third world country pretending to be a beacon of democracy and freedom what it might have been in the past, but is far from that anymore. The US was a really great country in the WWII and with the Marshall program helping Europe get on its feet and making them allies. In the 50's and 60's the US had prosperous middle class and strong unions, but then things started going wrong and from the late 70's it has been downhill. As a society the US has become very unstable and divided. The corporate media has lied to the people for decades driving a lot of people insane not knowing who they can trust. So they trust "outsiders" like Trump.
...

* In the beginning the establishment wasn't so firmly behind Biden. Any corporate candidate would have been good for them such as Pete Buttigieg. The most important thing was to stop Bernie. For the establishment even a second term for Trump would have been better than Bernie as the president, because Bernie would have been the president of the bottom 99 %, not the top 1 %.

The USA isn't a strong democracy.  Going back to the creation of the US Constitution, the USA was designed to be an upper-middle class oligarchy.

(Trivia:  George Washington was a probably the wealthiest person in the country at the time of the War of Independence.  His anti-British motivations was substantially based on his land speculation activities in trans-Appalachia where the British government as banned settlement.)

The US Constitution, by original design, gave the states far too much influence over the Federal government.  The Senate, though directly elected today, still gives all state the same number of Senators despite huge population size difference.  Worse, maybe, the States control all aspects of the Federal electoral process, including voter registration and district definitions.  And the States' process are control by highly partisan committees that (increasingly) are control by Republicans.

The bottom line is that poor quality of American democracy thwarts progressive policies that have much more popular support than can be expressed in Congress.  I think the conservative grip on the election the President and of Congress will be very hard -- possibly impossible -- to break.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: krummholz on October 20, 2021, 07:55:35 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 19, 2021, 03:30:19 PM
The demands of progressives might sadly be politically unrealistic (maybe because the progressives don't know how to play hardball and use leverage), but those demands are not fiscally unrealistic.

Political and fiscal considerations are not orthogonal, however. What progressives want is certainly fiscally unrealistic if the revenue cannot be generated to pay for it! But that brings us back to politics: the American voter will never agree to bring the tax rates up to what they would need to be to pay for the most ambitious programs. So if these programs pass, they will be "paid for" by more borrowing, or worse, by simply printing more money. In the end the result will be runaway inflation and, likely, economic chaos. Always be careful what you wish for, because you might get it, and whatever comes with it.

Knowing this, I consider the lesser of the two evils to be to embrace the center and fiscal conservatism.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on October 20, 2021, 09:06:54 AM
Quote from: krummholz on October 20, 2021, 07:55:35 AM
Political and fiscal considerations are not orthogonal, however. What progressives want is certainly fiscally unrealistic if the revenue cannot be generated to pay for it! But that brings us back to politics: the American voter will never agree to bring the tax rates up to what they would need to be to pay for the most ambitious programs. So if these programs pass, they will be "paid for" by more borrowing, or worse, by simply printing more money. In the end the result will be runaway inflation and, likely, economic chaos. Always be careful what you wish for, because you might get it, and whatever comes with it.

Knowing this, I consider the lesser of the two evils to be to embrace the center and fiscal conservatism.

All good sense.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 20, 2021, 09:11:45 AM
Quote from: krummholz on October 20, 2021, 07:55:35 AM
Political and fiscal considerations are not orthogonal, however. What progressives want is certainly fiscally unrealistic if the revenue cannot be generated to pay for it! But that brings us back to politics: the American voter will never agree to bring the tax rates up to what they would need to be to pay for the most ambitious programs. So if these programs pass, they will be "paid for" by more borrowing, or worse, by simply printing more money. In the end the result will be runaway inflation and, likely, economic chaos. Always be careful what you wish for, because you might get it, and whatever comes with it.

Knowing this, I consider the lesser of the two evils to be to embrace the center and fiscal conservatism.

According to polls most Americans (around 80 % I believe) support increasing taxes for the rich. Paying for these programs don't need to mean increasing the taxes for regular Americans. Also, Americans pay a lot of corporate taxes such as healthcare premiums. These programs alllow getting rid of these taxes and for most Americans the taxes would get lower despite of increased in state taxes. It all comes down to if the corporate media is willing to explain these things correctly to the people instead of fearmongering on the behalf of Big Pharma etc (corporate media and Big Pharma are cahoots because of drug add in the media. The US is insane country for allowing drug adds. Doctors tell what drug you should take! This creates insane insentives for the media to lie about healthcare.

How are increases to the military budget paid for? More borrowing I guess. Corporate media doesn't care, because the military industry complex is the benefactor. Why doesn't military budget increases cause runaway inflation? Funny how helping regular people is always the problem!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on October 20, 2021, 09:56:37 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 20, 2021, 02:43:22 AM
Meanwhile what TYT does these days looks trustworthy, but I am critical. So many "good guys" have turned into nonsense regurtating grifters. This doesn't mean I trust American corporate media more. They have been horrible for decades and still are. I trust Kyle Kulinski and David Pakman the most, but I am critical.
The root of the problem is the game itself. It's human psychology and money. Both corporate media and small reporters, journalists, and commentators face the same issue. That's why I trust neither.

Everyone needs to know of potential threats in the world. But to hype it up more than it needs to be to catch the attention of groups of people that are concerned with those specific possible threat is what gives them attention (and money). So they will continue to focus on those types of threats, as it is what feeds and houses them.

Even the people I listen to are not exempt from being guilty of that frequently. But at least I recognize it- so many people out there don't, at all.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 20, 2021, 12:46:29 PM
Quote from: greg on October 20, 2021, 09:56:37 AM
The root of the problem is the game itself. It's human psychology and money. Both corporate media and small reporters, journalists, and commentators face the same issue. That's why I trust neither.

Everyone needs to know of potential threats in the world. But to hype it up more than it needs to be to catch the attention of groups of people that are concerned with those specific possible threat is what gives them attention (and money). So they will continue to focus on those types of threats, as it is what feeds and houses them.

Even the people I listen to are not exempt from being guilty of that frequently. But at least I recognize it- so many people out there don't, at all.

You have to trust someone, otherwise you remain uninformed. There are honest people out there who don't compromise their integrity for money. It is about finding those individuals.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on October 20, 2021, 04:18:29 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 20, 2021, 12:46:29 PM
You have to trust someone, otherwise you remain uninformed. There are honest people out there who don't compromise their integrity for money. It is about finding those individuals.
You shouldn't trust anyone without evidence. That's why we have to use citations for everything in English classes. Once they show you evidence, you can trust them.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on October 20, 2021, 05:19:45 PM
If you get your news from Youtubers then how do you follow citations?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on October 20, 2021, 09:50:16 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on October 20, 2021, 05:19:45 PM
If you get your news from Youtubers then how do you follow citations?
They will show the article on screen while reading it and showing the URL (in case you want to look it up yourself), so pretty much the same thing as a citation, functionally speaking.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on October 20, 2021, 10:47:20 PM
Quote from: greg on October 20, 2021, 09:50:16 PM
They will show the article on screen while reading it and showing the URL (in case you want to look it up yourself), so pretty much the same thing as a citation, functionally speaking.

I'd like to see an example of that. By one of the Youtubers you like.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 21, 2021, 01:59:34 AM
Quote from: greg on October 20, 2021, 04:18:29 PM
You shouldn't trust anyone without evidence. That's why we have to use citations for everything in English classes. Once they show you evidence, you can trust them.

The ones I trust do that, but not always, because oftentimes things are opinions*. They make it clear it is about opions, their bias and why they have that opinion. Often they even say the audience can dissagree. It depends on the issue. Corporate media works diffenrently. They do not tell their bias and their opinions aren't honest. Even when they use evidence/data they try to smear it to go with their narrative.

* Cultural war stuff is typicallly about opinions. Something that happened today might be studied by political scholars years later so you don't have citations to give yet.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: krummholz on October 21, 2021, 07:29:52 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 20, 2021, 09:11:45 AM
According to polls most Americans (around 80 % I believe) support increasing taxes for the rich.

Of course, everyone supports raising taxes on OTHER PEOPLE.

QuotePaying for these programs don't need to mean increasing the taxes for regular Americans.

Yes, this is what a certain Senator from my state claims. If you think he is right, please show me the math. I have yet to see reasonable, credible numbers that say that all of this can be paid for by taxing the rich and corporations (at least, without raising their taxes to the point where the costs passed on to consumers are intolerable).

QuoteAlso, Americans pay a lot of corporate taxes such as healthcare premiums. These programs alllow getting rid of these taxes and for most Americans the taxes would get lower despite of increased in state taxes.

This is another of Bernie's claims. And for people who are paying their healthcare premiums entirely out of pocket, yes there would probably be a reduction. But if the single payer system is comparable to Medicare, then it will be FAR from cheap, and will probably cost more than what working people with health insurance through their employer pay towards their premiums by way of payroll deductions. In my case I *know* this to be true because I have Medicare Part A (hospital coverage) and for a time, thinking that I would incur a penalty if I tried to sign up for it after retirement, I was paying Part B (medical coverage) premiums as well. At the time I was advised to ask my Human Resources department if I could forgo their insurance plan and whether they would subsidize my Medicare premiums. Yes I could, but no they would not, and that should tell you something about the relative costs of the two programs. (And just to be clear, my employer pays the lion's share of my private insurance premiums.)

QuoteIt all comes down to if the corporate media is willing to explain these things correctly to the people instead of fearmongering on the behalf of Big Pharma etc (corporate media and Big Pharma are cahoots because of drug add in the media. The US is insane country for allowing drug adds. Doctors tell what drug you should take! This creates insane insentives for the media to lie about healthcare.

I agree with you about drug ads, but I see no evidence that the mainstream media (MSM) lies to the public about healthcare.

QuoteHow are increases to the military budget paid for? More borrowing I guess. Corporate media doesn't care, because the military industry complex is the benefactor. Why doesn't military budget increases cause runaway inflation? Funny how helping regular people is always the problem!

Of course, it's all paid for on borrowed money. That's why our debt is astronomical. And it all contributes to inflation, though not as much as giving people "free money" does. TANSTAAFL always applies. Pay now, or pay later. If you're not willing to pay, forgo. I have never lived in Europe, but my understanding is that all European countries with progressive public services tax their citizens at rates that Americans would never tolerate. I wish it were otherwise.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 21, 2021, 08:10:35 AM
Quote from: krummholz on October 21, 2021, 07:29:52 AM
Of course, everyone supports raising taxes on OTHER PEOPLE.

Sure, but this is not only that. It is about the sense of fairness, the rich paying their fare share. The tax burden has moved more and more to the regular people from the rich who can avoid taxes in way regular people can't so that their effective tax rate can be LOWER than that of regular people. Rich people typically earn money investing in stocks. So they don't need to do anything beyond taking financial risks. Regular people have to WORK for their money.

Quote from: krummholz on October 21, 2021, 07:29:52 AMYes, this is what a certain Senator from my state claims. If you think he is right, please show me the math. I have yet to see reasonable, credible numbers that say that all of this can be paid for by taxing the rich and corporations (at least, without raising their taxes to the point where the costs passed on to consumers are intolerable).

The math exist. Otherwise Bernie would not propose things. Other countries prove it works. It is not only taxing the rich. The main thing is the savings when you get rid of the mafia between you and your doctor. Americans pay massively for the healthcare getting very little in return while the money flows to the yachts of Insurance company / Big Pharma CEOs. The reason why you haven't seen the "credible numbers" is because the corporate media doesn't want to expose them.

Here is one article:

https://www.benefitspro.com/2020/02/18/latest-study-pegs-medicare-for-all-savings-at-450-billion-annually/:~:text=A%20new%20study%20published%20in%20The%20Lancet%20adds,more%20than%2068,000%20lives%20from%20unnecessary%20deathâ%C2%80%C2%94every%20year.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(19)33019-3/fulltext

It is about priorities. Is a 70 billion INCREASE to the military budget really necessory? What about directing thay money to expand Medicare?

Quote from: krummholz on October 21, 2021, 07:29:52 AMThis is another of Bernie's claims. And for people who are paying their healthcare premiums entirely out of pocket, yes there would probably be a reduction. But if the single payer system is comparable to Medicare, then it will be FAR from cheap, and will probably cost more than what working people with health insurance through their employer pay towards their premiums by way of payroll deductions. In my case I *know* this to be true because I have Medicare Part A (hospital coverage) and for a time, thinking that I would incur a penalty if I tried to sign up for it after retirement, I was paying Part B (medical coverage) premiums as well. At the time I was advised to ask my Human Resources department if I could forgo their insurance plan and whether they would subsidize my Medicare premiums. Yes I could, but no they would not, and that should tell you something about the relative costs of the two programs. (And just to be clear, my employer pays the lion's share of my private insurance premiums.)

How is healthcare everywhere in the World cheaper than in the US? We don't need to ask if Bernie is right. We know he is right because we have the evidence called rest of the World. Maybe this is so difficult for Americans, but you poor people are SCAMMED so badly! You are tied to your jobs because of healthcare. You can go bankrupt. Millions don't have access. You pay the highest drug prices in the World... ...well I don't care about Americans anymore. What a moronic country!  ???

Quote from: krummholz on October 21, 2021, 07:29:52 AMI agree with you about drug ads, but I see no evidence that the mainstream media (MSM) lies to the public about healthcare.

What? You don't see evidence? Amazing! Your really need to study how healthcare is done elsewhere in the World.

Quote from: krummholz on October 21, 2021, 07:29:52 AMOf course, it's all paid for on borrowed money. That's why our debt is astronomical. And it all contributes to inflation, though not as much as giving people "free money" does. TANSTAAFL always applies. Pay now, or pay later. If you're not willing to pay, forgo. I have never lived in Europe, but my understanding is that all European countries with progressive public services tax their citizens at rates that Americans would never tolerate. I wish it were otherwise.

It is true, that in general in Europe taxes are higher, but:

1) We get MUCH more for our taxes. It is not bad to pay, if you get something in return.
2) Our society functions better.

Higher taxes can be a good thing. It is about how the taxed money is spent. In Finland for example the taxed money is used in things that improve the quality of lives for all people. That's why Finland is the ranked the happiest country in the World for the 4th year in the row and other countries with high taxes also rank typically high. Also, in Finland the rich pay their fair share and people with low incame pay very little taxes (maybe even less than in the US) and we do not have premiums, co-pays etc.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on October 21, 2021, 08:19:18 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 21, 2021, 01:59:34 AM
The ones I trust do that, but not always, because oftentimes things are opinions*. They make it clear it is about opions, their bias and why they have that opinion. Often they even say the audience can dissagree. It depends on the issue. Corporate media works diffenrently. They do not tell their bias and their opinions aren't honest. Even when they use evidence/data they try to smear it to go with their narrative.

* Cultural war stuff is typicallly about opinions. Something that happened today might be studied by political scholars years later so you don't have citations to give yet.
Very true, I like this attitude of open discussion and opinions. Corporate media does work differently.
For example, someone from CNN once said to "not listen to other sources" (this was a while ago, might have been Stelter?, couldn't find the record of this but was very memorable).

Instantly, I would distrust anyone who says that. Anyone who tells others to listen to everyone would be someone I'd have a more favorable attitude toward. People who tell you not to listen to everyone and decide things for yourself are authoritarians, wanna dictators who think they know what's best for you.


Quote from: SimonNZ on October 20, 2021, 10:47:20 PM
I'd like to see an example of that. By one of the Youtubers you like.
Okay? Here's a random one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gn9hZIS54aI&t=720s

The articles are open, with the titles/URLs. The rest is just his commentary.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 21, 2021, 08:37:40 AM
Too much politics. Better go and listen to Carl Heinrich Graun (Te Deum).  0:)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on October 21, 2021, 10:52:31 AM
Quote from: greg on October 21, 2021, 08:19:18 AM


Okay? Here's a random one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gn9hZIS54aI&t=720s

The articles are open, with the titles/URLs. The rest is just his commentary.

That's showing some random articles that he is then ranting about - exactly the way Stephen Colbert for example does, and as with Colbert that's not news reporting and those are not citations of research and data and investigation for your own counterpoint.

This isn't news and it isn't reporting and it certainly isn't superior or preferable to CNN or any of the other research driven media you denigrate.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 21, 2021, 11:42:41 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on October 21, 2021, 10:52:31 AM
That's showing some random articles that he is then ranting about - exactly the way Stephen Colbert for example does, and as with Colbert that's not news reporting and those are not citations of research and data and investigation for your own counterpoint.

This isn't news and it isn't reporting and it certainly isn't superior or preferable to CNN or any of the other research driven media you denigrate.

"Random articles" (who says what is random?) can be based on researched data. If there are for example statistics, those numbers come from somewhere. Those numbers can be made up in someones head or they can be the result of research in which case they are hard facts.

CNN is not "research driven media." Their function is to manufacture consent for the benefit of the establishment. They uphold a narrative where war is good, medicare for all is bad, tax cuts for the rich is good, tuition free education is a pie in the sky (even if even much poorer Slovenia in East Europe has found a way to "pay for it"), poor people are lazy so its their own fault they are poor etc. In order to uphold this narrative they need to frame facts in smearing way. They do this by omitting key information so that the viewers can't put things in perspective. They also also talk about the lefties and progressives using negative language and they hardly ever have real lefties and progressives in their programs to give their perspective, for example to debunk their corporate claim and narrative.

It is a fair claim that random Youtubers don't always do the research they could do, but at least some of these Youtubers at least try to be fact-based. Compared to these Youtubers CNN and similar corporate outlets are laughable bad. They are not in the business of informing their viewers. They are in the business of manufacturing consent. It is tragic how millions of people don't understand that.

Enough politics again - Time to watch "Forbidden Planet" on Blu-ray. I received it finally today.  $:)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on October 21, 2021, 11:51:14 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on October 21, 2021, 10:52:31 AM
That's showing some random articles that he is then ranting about - exactly the way Stephen Colbert for example does, and as with Colbert that's not news reporting and those are not citations of research and data and investigation for your own counterpoint.

This isn't news and it isn't reporting and it certainly isn't superior or preferable to CNN or any of the other research driven media you denigrate.

GIGO
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on October 21, 2021, 11:53:37 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 21, 2021, 11:42:41 AM
CNN is not "research driven media." Their function is to manufacture consent for the benefit of the establishment.

I hope that at least you smile a little at yourself while you're regurgitating agitprop.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on October 21, 2021, 12:33:01 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 21, 2021, 11:42:41 AM
"Random articles" (who says what is random?) can be based on researched data. If there are for example statistics, those numbers come from somewhere. Those numbers can be made up in someones head or they can be the result of research in which case they are hard facts.

CNN is not "research driven media." Their function is to manufacture consent for the benefit of the establishment. They uphold a narrative where war is good, medicare for all is bad, tax cuts for the rich is good, tuition free education is a pie in the sky (even if even much poorer Slovenia in East Europe has found a way to "pay for it"), poor people are lazy so its their own fault they are poor etc. In order to uphold this narrative they need to frame facts in smearing way. They do this by omitting key information so that the viewers can't put things in perspective. They also also talk about the lefties and progressives using negative language and they hardly ever have real lefties and progressives in their programs to give their perspective, for example to debunk their corporate claim and narrative.

It is a fair claim that random Youtubers don't always do the research they could do, but at least some of these Youtubers at least try to be fact-based. Compared to these Youtubers CNN and similar corporate outlets are laughable bad. They are not in the business of informing their viewers. They are in the business of manufacturing consent. It is tragic how millions of people don't understand that.

Enough politics again - Time to watch "Forbidden Planet" on Blu-ray. I received it finally today.  $:)

The articles he's riffing on may be fine. It's his "guy at the end of the bar" commentary being taken as news and reporting I have a problem with.

As I've said to both of you before: you'd have a more nuanced view of mainstream media if you were actually familiar with it rather than taking your bar guys word that they are all terrible so you should just stick with them.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on October 21, 2021, 12:38:57 PM
House votes to hold Bannon in contempt for refusing to comply with Jan. 6 subpoena
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: krummholz on October 21, 2021, 04:05:41 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 21, 2021, 08:10:35 AM
Sure, but this is not only that. It is about the sense of fairness, the rich paying their fare share. The tax burden has moved more and more to the regular people from the rich who can avoid taxes in way regular people can't so that their effective tax rate can be LOWER than that of regular people. Rich people typically earn money investing in stocks. So they don't need to do anything beyond taking financial risks. Regular people have to WORK for their money.

I agree with you about fairness. My argument is not that the rich shouldn't pay more in taxes - they absolutely should. The question is whether, if they paid their fair share, the revenue thus generated would pay for a universal health care system that is otherwise free to the public. I still say that I have never seen credible numbers to that effect, and I categorically reject the allegation that the MSM are in the pocket of some corporate monolith intent on concealing the truth. It MIGHT be enough to pay for a Medicare For All plan, but that is a very different animal and while it would help out some people, it would make health care much more expensive for others (me, for example, as I explained in my last post), and let's not forget that we are not adequately funding the current Medicare program as it is, which is projected to become insolvent 5 years from now.

QuoteThe math exist. Otherwise Bernie would not propose things. Other countries prove it works. It is not only taxing the rich. The main thing is the savings when you get rid of the mafia between you and your doctor. Americans pay massively for the healthcare getting very little in return while the money flows to the yachts of Insurance company / Big Pharma CEOs. The reason why you haven't seen the "credible numbers" is because the corporate media doesn't want to expose them.

Bernie could not propose something that is pie in the sky? Why do you say that? Politicians lie all the time. Again, asserting that "the media" doesn't want to expose the true numbers is sheer agitprop, unless you have evidence to back it up.

Here is one article:

Quotehttps://www.benefitspro.com/2020/02/18/latest-study-pegs-medicare-for-all-savings-at-450-billion-annually/:~:text=A%20new%20study%20published%20in%20The%20Lancet%20adds,more%20than%2068,000%20lives%20from%20unnecessary%20deathâ%C2%80%C2%94every%20year.

404 error.

Quotehttps://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(19)33019-3/fulltext

Very long article, which I will try to read when I have time. Thank you.

QuoteIt is about priorities. Is a 70 billion INCREASE to the military budget really necessory? What about directing thay money to expand Medicare?

Sadly, in the world we live in, and considering the threats to national security that the US faces, I can accept that it is.

QuoteIt is true, that in general in Europe taxes are higher, but:

1) We get MUCH more for our taxes. It is not bad to pay, if you get something in return.
2) Our society functions better.

Higher taxes can be a good thing. It is about how the taxed money is spent. In Finland for example the taxed money is used in things that improve the quality of lives for all people. That's why Finland is the ranked the happiest country in the World for the 4th year in the row and other countries with high taxes also rank typically high. Also, in Finland the rich pay their fair share and people with low incame pay very little taxes (maybe even less than in the US) and we do not have premiums, co-pays etc.

All true, and you're preaching to the choir here. My point is simply that, as you've admitted, this level of service requires higher taxes. If you want something, you had better be willing to pay for it. The American public isn't willing to pay higher taxes, full stop. You can call us morons or whatever, but it is what it is. That's why this isn't going to happen here anytime soon. Does it suck? Yes. But what would suck worse is trying to implement this without the authority to raise the revenue needed, and paying for it on borrowed or simply printed money.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on October 22, 2021, 03:06:36 AM
Quote from: krummholz on October 21, 2021, 07:29:52 AM


Of course, it's all paid for on borrowed money. That's why our debt is astronomical. And it all contributes to inflation, though not as much as giving people "free money" does. TANSTAAFL always applies. Pay now, or pay later. If you're not willing to pay, forgo. I have never lived in Europe, but my understanding is that all European countries with progressive public services tax their citizens at rates that Americans would never tolerate. I wish it were otherwise.
I don't feel expert enough to know how to compare. I can see some metrics but I don't know what factors go into this. For example, I live in Japan where everyone is covered by some system and healthcare out of pocket is pretty cheap for me. Japan has twice the debt as the U.S. (to GDP) although that alone may be misleading. It's tax rate is comparable I think. I mean I think it's closer to the U.S. than Northern European countries.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 22, 2021, 03:31:09 AM
Quote from: krummholz on October 21, 2021, 04:05:41 PM
I agree with you about fairness. My argument is not that the rich shouldn't pay more in taxes - they absolutely should. The question is whether, if they paid their fair share, the revenue thus generated would pay for a universal health care system that is otherwise free to the public. I still say that I have never seen credible numbers to that effect, and I categorically reject the allegation that the MSM are in the pocket of some corporate monolith intent on concealing the truth. It MIGHT be enough to pay for a Medicare For All plan, but that is a very different animal and while it would help out some people, it would make health care much more expensive for others (me, for example, as I explained in my last post), and let's not forget that we are not adequately funding the current Medicare program as it is, which is projected to become insolvent 5 years from now.

As far as I know, M4A (as proposed by people like Bernie Sanders) would not be financed only with tax increases of the rich, but also regular people would see taxes increase. However, for regular people this would be less than what they would save on not paying for premiums and other costs of the current system. Bernie is a lefty. He wants to help regular people and the poor on the expense of the rich. Do you think this senator who has been fighting for M4A for DECADES doesn't know the math? It is the MSM creating the doubts in order to protect status quo.

People who get healthcare paid by their employee would get higher salaries, because their employee doesn't need to pay for the healthcare. So, even if your taxes go up your net incomes goes up. Even if your expensies went up under M4A (would be very special case) you could feel good because millions of fellow American would have access to healtcare and this would save so many lives. Or is money the only thing that matters to you? Are you that shallow. Suffering off other people does not matter to you?

Quote from: krummholz on October 21, 2021, 04:05:41 PMBernie could not propose something that is pie in the sky? Why do you say that? Politicians lie all the time. Again, asserting that "the media" doesn't want to expose the true numbers is sheer agitprop, unless you have evidence to back it up.

Yes in the US they lie all the time, but there are a few good Apples and Bernie Sanders is one of them. The fact that this is unclear to you tells more about you than Bernie Sanders. Bernie doesn't take corporate money so why would he lie for corporations? Why do corporations and the establishment hate him if he lies for them? What is his lies about?

What Bernie proposes exists in other countries so clearly it is not pie in the sky. The difference between the US and the other countries is that elsewhere the healhtcare industry doesn't completely own the government, well, ALMOST completely. They don't own Bernie Sanders and some other lefty politicians.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on October 22, 2021, 03:46:58 AM
Quote from: krummholz on October 21, 2021, 04:05:41 PM
I agree with you about fairness. My argument is not that the rich shouldn't pay more in taxes - they absolutely should. The question is whether, if they paid their fair share, the revenue thus generated would pay for a universal health care system that is otherwise free to the public. I still say that I have never seen credible numbers to that effect, and I categorically reject the allegation that the MSM are in the pocket of some corporate monolith intent on concealing the truth. It MIGHT be enough to pay for a Medicare For All plan, but that is a very different animal and while it would help out some people, it would make health care much more expensive for others (me, for example, as I explained in my last post), and let's not forget that we are not adequately funding the current Medicare program as it is, which is projected to become insolvent 5 years from now.
...

From what I observe from here in the Great White North, the American MSM isn't "in the pocket" of health industry monolith, (though Congress undoubtedly is).  Rather the MSM in abused of the same narrow set of presumptions as is the American upper-middle class in general, (or, say, you).

There is plenty of money in the USA -- for that matter, more than any other country -- to pay for universal health care.  "Medicare for all" isn't a good model because Medicare improperly funded for a start:  the "trust fund" approach is nonsense.  Much less wealthy counties the USA are able to fund universal health care, usually without premiums or co-pays, as current expenditure of government.  To be sure, it doesn't happen without a certain amount of fuss usually created by with a those with a vested interest in privatizing health services.

Nobody in Canada pays more specifically for their health care on account of our system, though, of course taxes are a somewhat higher to pay for the system as a whole.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 22, 2021, 09:56:33 AM
This is very time consuming for me and I am not so interested anymore to debate over this.

Quote from: krummholz on October 21, 2021, 04:05:41 PM404 error.

Sorry. Lets try again:

https://www.benefitspro.com/2020/02/18/latest-study-pegs-medicare-for-all-savings-at-450-billion-annually/
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: krummholz on October 22, 2021, 10:03:37 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 22, 2021, 03:31:09 AM
As far as I know, M4A (as proposed by people like Bernie Sanders) would not be financed only with tax increases of the rich, but also regular people would see taxes increase. However, for regular people this would be less than what they would save on not paying for premiums and other costs of the current system. Bernie is a lefty. He wants to help regular people and the poor on the expense of the rich. Do you think this senator who has been fighting for M4A for DECADES doesn't know the math?

I think he is so biased that he is likely making assumptions that may well prove to be erroneous. And he reckons without the fact that if you try to push higher taxes on the American people, the pushback will be overwhelming. Look at what happened after the Obama years. Don't you think that is likely to happen again if the Left manages to get something as progressive as this passed?

QuoteIt is the MSM creating the doubts in order to protect status quo.

There you go again with the agitprop. It's ironic really, considering that nearly the exact opposite allegation is made by Trump and his followers, that the MSM is controlled by communists and what they call "globalists".

QuotePeople who get healthcare paid by their employee would get higher salaries, because their employee doesn't need to pay for the healthcare. So, even if your taxes go up your net incomes goes up. Even if your expensies went up under M4A (would be very special case) you could feel good because millions of fellow American would have access to healtcare and this would save so many lives. Or is money the only thing that matters to you? Are you that shallow. Suffering off other people does not matter to you?

Wow. You have not been reading what I have written. I would be very happy to see this go through EVEN THOUGH it would cost me a small increase in my healthcare expenses. My salary would go up by roughly $70 per month but because I would be paying the premiums out of pocket (again, assuming this is Medicare as we know it, except that everyone is eligible), that would be about $150 per month after a drug plan was added in, for a net loss of $80/mo. The gain for me would be that I would not be tied to my job for fear of losing my health insurance. But I am not sure how it would balance out for most people. I have the highest tier plan my employer offers. For those opting for cheaper plans, at least at my employer, the loss would be greater.

My worry, as I've said several times now, is how it would be paid for. My guess is that it would not, because the pushback against higher taxes would nix anything like this, so it would either not happen or we would simply tack this onto the deficit. That is not a recipe for a healthy future, economically speaking.

QuoteYes in the US they lie all the time, but there are a few good Apples and Bernie Sanders is one of them. The fact that this is unclear to you tells more about you than Bernie Sanders. Bernie doesn't take corporate money so why would he lie for corporations? Why do corporations and the establishment hate him if he lies for them? What is his lies about?

Lies are not always about shilling for a more powerful entity like a mega-corporation. They can be untruths we tell ourselves because we so much want something to be true. Bernie wants to see the US remade on the Scandinavian model. It's a noble goal, I agree. But having watched how the political pendulum swings in this country for over 60 years now, and knowing that our electoral system favors rural states which are now predominantly Red (meaning, Republican, not Communist), I am convinced it is not going to happen, and trying to force it to happen will result in another four years of Trump, or maybe eight of a Trump clone. Someday, maybe we'll be mature enough to accept higher taxes for something that should exist in every first world country. We're not there yet though.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 22, 2021, 10:15:25 AM
Quote from: krummholz on October 21, 2021, 04:05:41 PM
Sadly, in the world we live in, and considering the threats to national security that the US faces, I can accept that it is.

The safety of Americans is not improved by increasing the military budget. That is not even the purpose of those increases. The purpose of those increases is to funnel more money to the military industry complex. The US could half its military budget and still be the king of the hill militarily. The biggest threads to Americans come from the societal divide (the oligarchic tension between the top 1 % and the bottom 99 % which the establishment skilfully make manifest itself as right vs left cultural war), lack of healthcare among millions of Americans, the effects of climate change, relaxed gun laws and the amount of guns, domestic right-wing terrorism and other things of that nature. Increases in military budget do not address these issues and therefore don't help increasing the security of Americans. The real solutions are implementing things like progressive ideas to leviate societal tension, making gun laws stricter, addressing climate change, medicare for all and ending the unnecessary wars. American soldiers won't die in the middle east when there are no American soldiers in the middle east.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on October 22, 2021, 10:19:08 AM
It's as easy as waving a wand.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 22, 2021, 10:22:59 AM
Quote from: krummholz on October 22, 2021, 10:03:37 AM
I think he is so biased that he is likely making assumptions that may well prove to be erroneous. And he reckons without the fact that if you try to push higher taxes on the American people, the pushback will be overwhelming. Look at what happened after the Obama years. Don't you think that is likely to happen again if the Left manages to get something as progressive as this passed?

This is endless. All I say is what happened after Obama happened because Obama didn't govern as progressive as he campaigned. People were disappointed in his corporate ways. Obama's BIG thing was Obamacare, which is originally a Republican plan from the 80's taylored to secure the business model for insurance companies mandating people to get insured! Americans want better than that, a healthcare system were EVERYBODY is covered and people don't go bankrupt because of medical bill. Obama did not improve the lives of Americans much.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 22, 2021, 10:28:26 AM
Quote from: krummholz on October 22, 2021, 10:03:37 AM
There you go again with the agitprop. It's ironic really, considering that nearly the exact opposite allegation is made by Trump and his followers, that the MSM is controlled by communists and what they call "globalists".

The difference is I am right. They are wrong. They are not "globalists" nor communist (what insane claim!). They are pro establishment. They want to uphold the oligarchic status quo and they manufacture consent for that purpose. It is that simple. I am astonished how people here don't understand this.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: krummholz on October 22, 2021, 10:30:44 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 22, 2021, 10:15:25 AM
The safety of Americans is not improved by increasing the military budget. That is not even the purpose of those increases. The purpose of those increases is to funnel more money to the military industry complex.

Oh, brother... :(

I can see we can't even agree on basic premises, so discussion is useless. :(
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 22, 2021, 10:34:43 AM
Quote from: krummholz on October 22, 2021, 10:30:44 AM
Oh, brother... :(

I can see we can't even agree on basic premises, so discussion is useless. :(

Yeah, by now it is clear for me too. This is totally hopeless. That's why I stop here and go to watch the movie "Coma" on Blu-ray  ;D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on October 22, 2021, 12:22:15 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 22, 2021, 10:28:26 AM
The difference is I am right. They are wrong. They are not "globalists" nor communist (what insane claim!). They are pro establishment. They want to uphold the oligarchic status quo and they manufacture consent for that purpose. It is that simple. I am astonished how people here don't understand this.

Pick a media source and pick a topic. I'll provide links for you so you can see how they really are covered rather than taking your youtubers word about them on faith.

Also: the title of Chomsky and Herman's Manufacturing Consent refers to reporters consent of specific foundational assumptions in national interest policies- not the unthinking consent of the reader or viewer of the reporting. If you actually read the author you assume you understand through some kind of osmosis you'd know this and have many other false assumptions corrected.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on October 22, 2021, 01:00:34 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 22, 2021, 10:34:43 AM
Yeah, by now it is clear for me too. This is totally hopeless. That's why I stop here and go to watch the movie "Coma" on Blu-ray  ;D

Funny how, no matter what starts a discussion, we always revert to the same old argument. You know this is how you end up getting chastised and hating it. Yet here we are again.

Your options are the same as ever, I hope you will avail yourself of a safe one and make the most of the Blu-Ray timeout you have taken.

GB
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on October 22, 2021, 08:50:37 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on October 21, 2021, 10:52:31 AM
This isn't news and it isn't reporting and it certainly isn't superior or preferable to CNN or any of the other research driven media you denigrate.
It's news commentary... not sure if I ever called his videos themselves "news," but the articles themselves shown on-screen may be considered news articles.

Whether it's preferable is mostly a matter of taste. There's no one best way to take in the news. If people want to read articles by themselves, that's fine. Or if they want critique along that, that's also fine. It's not like I never watch CNN's videos on youtube (I don't watch TV any more), or never read online articles. The thing I like about his videos is the extra dimension to it, while maintaining sort of moderate opinions (a mix of right-wing and left-wing, really). That's why to me it seems preferable, more on top of more. Information needs to be challenged, without a challenger then it can become propaganda, info that disrespects the truth.

But overall, mixing things up is the most "superior" way to get news IMO, if that is a question to ponder.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 23, 2021, 03:37:16 AM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on October 22, 2021, 01:00:34 PM
Funny how, no matter what starts a discussion, we always revert to the same old argument. You know this is how you end up getting chastised and hating it. Yet here we are again.

Your options are the same as ever, I hope you will avail yourself of a safe one and make the most of the Blu-Ray timeout you have taken.

GB

I'm sorry I exist. In 50 years I should be dead and gone. I don't consider myself a problem (I consider myself a human being), but to others I am one, clearly. I am not the only one with these opinions. There are millions of people in the World thinking the way I do. What are we lefties supposed to do? Just watch Blu-rays and shut up? I don't get angry anymore. I don't care enough anymore to get angry. I am calm as you can see from the language I use. I am just confused about what is the purpose of my life? People are never supportive of what I do, so of course I feel I am bad at everything! US politics is just another example. According to you I suck at it. Why am I not allowed to be a communicator/influencer? Wrong political views? Wrong nationality? Wrong personality type? What?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on October 23, 2021, 04:29:01 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 22, 2021, 10:22:59 AM
This is endless. All I say is what happened after Obama happened because Obama didn't govern as progressive as he campaigned. People were disappointed in his corporate ways. Obama's BIG thing was Obamacare, which is originally a Republican plan from the 80's taylored to secure the business model for insurance companies mandating people to get insured! Americans want better than that, a healthcare system were EVERYBODY is covered and people don't go bankrupt because of medical bill. Obama did not improve the lives of Americans much.

Obama was a hardcore American centrist.  "Obamacare" was never anything more than a band-aid applied to the shattered pelvis that is US health care.

A real universal health care system provide all basic care (a) for everyone without restrictions, (b) be free of premiums, co-pays, or the like, (c) funded by general tax revenues, (d) and treated as a current expenditure of government.

The good news is that such a system would be far cheaper than the current US for-profit system.

The bad news is that the for-profit health care industry, (insurance, drugs, and all forms of delivery), have a testicle-crushing grip on Congress, and by dint of extensive media have mind-control over the likes of several of our friends here at GMG.  The major myth they cultivate is that a universal system would be impossibly expensive;  our folks here are in a mental rut, trapped by the myopic illusion of high cost, premiums, and funding.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: krummholz on October 23, 2021, 05:14:37 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on October 23, 2021, 04:29:01 AM
Obama was a hardcore American centrist.  "Obamacare" was never anything more than a band-aid applied to the shattered pelvis that is US health care.

A real universal health care system provide all basic care (a) for everyone without restrictions, (b) be free of premiums, co-pays, or the like, (c) funded by general tax revenues, (d) and treated as a current expenditure of government.

The good news is that such a system would be far cheaper than the current US for-profit system.

The bad news is that the for-profit health care industry, (insurance, drugs, and all forms of delivery), have a testicle-crushing grip on Congress, and by dint of extensive media have mind-control over the likes of several of our friends here at GMG.  The major myth they cultivate is that a universal system would be impossibly expensive;  our folks here are in a mental rut, trapped by the myopic illusion of high cost, premiums, and funding.

I presume I'm one of the "several of our friends here at GMG" that you're referring to, but in fact I've never said nor believed that a universal health care system in the US would be "impossibly expensive". If you read my previous posts carefully, you'll see that what I've actually said is that the hope that it could be paid for entirely by making the rich pay their fair share in taxes is a false one, and one that (as Poju said) not even Bernie Sanders explicitly promotes, at least not when he is pressed to explain his position carefully, and he is arguing for Medicare For All rather than true, universal health care. Yet that is the impression that many advocates seem to be trying to give. The problem is that it will require higher taxes for everyone else as well, and significantly higher taxes if it is to be fully paid for and not partially tacked onto the growing national debt. And the problem is that significantly higher taxes are a non-starter politically in the US. Full stop, end of story. That's why it won't happen. It's not because the media or anyone else is lying to the American public, it's because the public, by and large, understands what it will entail. We could afford to pay for it, we're simply unwilling to. The real pressure on Congress (and the real danger, IMHO) will be to deliver something like this without a realistic means to pay for it. Compromises will be made, and in the end we will both have an inferior system and go further into debt to finance it... much as has happened with the current version of Medicare. If that is the end result, it would be better not to go down that road.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on October 23, 2021, 06:12:04 AM
Quote from: krummholz on October 23, 2021, 05:14:37 AM
I presume I'm one of the "several of our friends here at GMG" that you're referring to, but in fact I've never said nor believed that a universal health care system in the US would be "impossibly expensive". If you read my previous posts carefully, you'll see that what I've actually said is that the hope that it could be paid for entirely by making the rich pay their fair share in taxes is a false one, and one that (as Poju said) not even Bernie Sanders explicitly promotes, at least not when he is pressed to explain his position carefully, and he is arguing for Medicare For All rather than true, universal health care. Yet that is the impression that many advocates seem to be trying to give. The problem is that it will require higher taxes for everyone else as well, and significantly higher taxes if it is to be fully paid for and not partially tacked onto the growing national debt. And the problem is that significantly higher taxes are a non-starter politically in the US. Full stop, end of story. That's why it won't happen. It's not because the media or anyone else is lying to the American public, it's because the public, by and large, understands what it will entail. We could afford to pay for it, we're simply unwilling to. The real pressure on Congress (and the real danger, IMHO) will be to deliver something like this without a realistic means to pay for it. Compromises will be made, and in the end we will both have an inferior system and go further into debt to finance it... much as has happened with the current version of Medicare. If that is the end result, it would be better not to go down that road.

Granted yes, you haven't yourself been utterly against universal healthcare or making the Rich pay.

Yes, also it will mean higher taxes for everyone, (as here in Canada);  it will also mean far low insurance premiums for almost everyone, including employers.  The central point to grasp is that overall health care costs could/should/would be far lower, much more in line with those in other OECD countries.  Worth reiterating is that these lower cost countries achieve equal or better health outcomes.

I dare say you're right that allowing higher taxes would be necessary for any real progress, is a political brick wall for American politicians -- which is why Sanders, et al., rarely mention is.  But, at least in the case of health care, it is thoroughly irrational -- US tax payers don't want to pay the taxes but are willing needlessly will in to pay much more in premiums, co-pays, and out-of-pocket.  The impasse must be broke and it doesn't help to keep yelling, "It's impossible, it can't be done !!"
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 23, 2021, 06:17:59 AM
Fëanor is doing such a good job here that I can be silent in order to keep Gurn happy.  0:)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on October 23, 2021, 06:18:27 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 23, 2021, 03:37:16 AM
I'm sorry I exist. In 50 years I should be dead and gone. I don't consider myself a problem (I consider myself a human being), but to others I am one, clearly. I am not the only one with these opinions. There are millions of people in the World thinking the way I do. What are we lefties supposed to do? Just watch Blu-rays and shut up? I don't get angry anymore. I don't care enough anymore to get angry. I am calm as you can see from the language I use. I am just confused about what is the purpose of my life? People are never supportive of what I do, so of course I feel I am bad at everything! US politics is just another example. According to you I suck at it. Why am I not allowed to be a communicator/influencer? Wrong political views? Wrong nationality? Wrong personality type? What?
for what it's worth, and though I don't always agree with you, I don't think you've earned the condescension you get around here. Maybe I'm missing something.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 23, 2021, 06:22:08 AM
Quote from: milk on October 23, 2021, 06:18:27 AM
for what it's worth, and though I don't always agree with you, I don't think you've earned the condescension you get around here. Maybe I'm missing something.

Thanks! Maybe we are missing the same thing?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Brahmsian on October 23, 2021, 06:26:31 AM
Quote from: milk on October 23, 2021, 06:18:27 AM
for what it's worth, and though I don't always agree with you, I don't think you've earned the condescension you get around here. Maybe I'm missing something.

+1
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: krummholz on October 23, 2021, 07:31:20 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on October 23, 2021, 06:12:04 AM
Yes, also it will mean higher taxes for everyone, (as here in Canada);  it will also mean far low insurance premiums for almost everyone, including employers.  The central point to grasp is that overall health care costs could/should/would be far lower, much more in line with those in other OECD countries.  Worth reiterating is that these lower cost countries achieve equal or better health outcomes.

While I don't disagree in principle, I do question whether this can be done without significant sacrifice by US health professionals, and I daresay, significant pain to consumers of health care in other countries who currently pay much less than we do for prescription drugs. Health professionals, because as I understand it, at least in Europe, physicians do not earn the enormous salaries (much of which ends up going towards malpractice insurance) that physicians here in the US do. And consumers in other countries because, though I have never seen this discussed, it seems self-evident that we in the US, through the high costs we pay for prescription drugs, are in a sense subsidizing the lower costs that European countries pay, i.e. are at least partly making up the difference in the profits of the big pharma companies. So it seems very likely that resistance from big pharma would be another brick wall in the way of anything like this becoming reality in the US, and that there would be huge pressure from big pharma on countries with universal health care to renegotiate drug prices upward. I could be wrong about this, but given the enormous power and profitability of the pharma industry, it seems like another inevitable hurdle that would somehow need to be overcome.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 23, 2021, 07:38:23 AM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on October 23, 2021, 06:46:55 AM
+1
Quote from: OrchestralNut on October 23, 2021, 06:26:31 AM
+1

Thank you both! Support appreciated! 0:)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on October 23, 2021, 10:15:12 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 23, 2021, 07:38:23 AM
Thank you both! Support appreciated! 0:)
+1
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on October 23, 2021, 10:26:18 AM
Quote from: krummholz on October 23, 2021, 07:31:20 AM
While I don't disagree in principle, I do question whether this can be done without significant sacrifice by US health professionals, and I daresay, significant pain to consumers of health care in other countries who currently pay much less than we do for prescription drugs. Health professionals, because as I understand it, at least in Europe, physicians do not earn the enormous salaries (much of which ends up going towards malpractice insurance) that physicians here in the US do. And consumers in other countries because, though I have never seen this discussed, it seems self-evident that we in the US, through the high costs we pay for prescription drugs, are in a sense subsidizing the lower costs that European countries pay, i.e. are at least partly making up the difference in the profits of the big pharma companies. So it seems very likely that resistance from big pharma would be another brick wall in the way of anything like this becoming reality in the US, and that there would be huge pressure from big pharma on countries with universal health care to renegotiate drug prices upward. I could be wrong about this, but given the enormous power and profitability of the pharma industry, it seems like another inevitable hurdle that would somehow need to be overcome.

Well seems to me you are scrapping the bottom of the barrel for excuses to do nothing about the US health care calamity.

Of course Big Pharma is fighting tooth & claw against changes to the current situation, such as allowing states to negotiate drug prices..  That situation is huge profits.  The business about Americans subsidizing foreign drug research and prices is BS;  drugs, (such as Covid-19 vaccines), are being developed world-wide.  Furthermore an excessive amount drug development in the USA is targeting chronic conditions, rather that acute conditions such as infections and cancer, because they promise decades of patent-protected profits.  The advertising I see on US media for prescription drugs, (most of them targeting the aforementioned chronic conditions), is quite disgusting and ought to be banned.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on October 23, 2021, 10:34:52 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on October 23, 2021, 10:26:18 AM
Well seems to me you are scrapping the bottom of the barrel for excuses to do nothing about the US health care calamity.

That seems to me an unnecessarily personal remark. what do you suppose krummholz can do about it? Why your accusation of excuses? Go take a cold shower, buddy.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: krummholz on October 23, 2021, 11:03:42 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on October 23, 2021, 10:26:18 AM
Well seems to me you are scrapping the bottom of the barrel for excuses to do nothing about the US health care calamity.

Now you're stooping to ad hominems too? Well in that case I'll bow out of this discussion. First, though, to reply to your points...

Quote
Of course Big Pharma is fighting tooth & claw against changes to the current situation, such as allowing states to negotiate drug prices..  That situation is huge profits.  The business about Americans subsidizing foreign drug research and prices is BS;  drugs, (such as Covid-19 vaccines), are being developed world-wide.  Furthermore an excessive amount drug development in the USA is targeting chronic conditions, rather that acute conditions such as infections and cancer, because they promise decades of patent-protected profits.  The advertising I see on US media for prescription drugs, (most of them targeting the aforementioned chronic conditions), is quite disgusting and ought to be banned.

FTR, I said absolutely nothing about the US subsidizing foreign research. I was not talking about research at all. I was simply pointing out that drug companies (the biggest of which are international conglomerates) may have been willing to negotiate fairly low prices with other OECD countries' healthcare systems as long as they had a major customer (the US market) willing to pay premium prices for their products. What leverage does the US have at this point? Seems this (meaningful caps on drug prices) is something that will have to be legislated, something not likely to happen in the US Congress as long as the Dems' majority is as razor thin as it is.

That is not to say we shouldn't try to fix it - in fact, I think reducing the cost of pharmaceuticals is the single step that will make the biggest dent in the US healthcare problem. Given that universal health care seems to be a non-starter here, looking for other ways to reduce the costs of healthcare seems to be the way to go. My big lament is that the political will to actually do something about it seems to be sorely lacking today.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on October 23, 2021, 02:14:40 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 23, 2021, 03:37:16 AM
People are never supportive of what I do, so of course I feel I am bad at everything! US politics is just another example. According to you I suck at it. Why am I not allowed to be a communicator/influencer? Wrong political views? Wrong nationality? Wrong personality type? What?

See, this has been explained, and the fact that you have to ask it again is part of the problem. You hear people disagreeing but don't take in their reasons, just that there is pushback,.

You think things are black and white and solutions easy, when every topic you address is in fact massively complicated and understand and knowing all the moving parts and theories and the nature of past attempts at solutions any one of the - to say nothing of navigating a way through them - requires a full library's worth of reading to have the certainty and knowledge you believe it is your right to be recognised as having.

If I acted like I knew any political topic completely (let alone based only on just a smattering of punditry) I'd deserve whatever "condescension" came my way. I've deserved ot for even less than that.

Nobody is saying you cant communicate , but the answer to this "Why?" is that you need a better sense of just how much you still have to learn.

Will you take this on board this time, or yet again deflect to suggest its about something other than what I'm trying to tell you as directly as possible?

Why do I keep scratching at this? Because it worries me that this is the way many now get their so-called ?news": via amateur Youtube bobbleheads with their uncomplicated faith in their own certainty and easily acquired absolute truths, and I'm looking for some sign of hope - and I'm not seeing it, here or elsewhere.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 23, 2021, 02:27:53 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 23, 2021, 10:34:52 AM
That seems to me an unnecessarily personal remark. what do you suppose krummholz can do about it? Why your accusation of excuses? Go take a cold shower, buddy.

I think Fëanor is on point. Does krummholz even want to do something? The root problem is corruption due to legalised bribery. What the left talks about is an Amendment to take money out of politics. That would allow the politicians to serve their voters rather than millionaires, billionaires and corporations. Once that obstacle to real democracy is removed, the excuses against universal healthcare (and many other progressive things) magically go away.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on October 23, 2021, 02:38:01 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 23, 2021, 02:27:53 PM
I think Fëanor is on point. Does krummholz even want to do something?

Well, congratulations for compounding an unnecessary personal remark with unnecessary personal speculation. You made a category error earlier. Yes, you are a human being, and your being such is not a problem. Perhaps the problem is that you should do something better or otherwise.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on October 23, 2021, 04:12:44 PM
Quote from: krummholz on October 23, 2021, 11:03:42 AM
Now you're stooping to ad hominems too? Well in that case I'll bow out of this discussion. First, though, to reply to your points...

Not at all really, and apologies if it struck you that way.  I was only saying that the particular argument was not much of an excuse for American's inaction.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on October 23, 2021, 04:19:03 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 23, 2021, 10:34:52 AM
That seems to me an unnecessarily personal remark. what do you suppose krummholz can do about it? Why your accusation of excuses? Go take a cold shower, buddy.

Sorry if it seemed a personal attack.  Americans in general tend to not see the forest for the trees when it comes the shortcomings of their own system and devise apologetics accordingly;  at worse krummhotz is just another example.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: krummholz on October 23, 2021, 04:48:14 PM
Quote from: Fëanor on October 23, 2021, 04:12:44 PM
Not at all really, and apologies if it struck you that way.  I was only saying that the particular argument was not much of an excuse for American's inaction.

It was not intended as an "excuse" for anything. I was simply pointing out what I think is going to be a major hurdle to overcome, even once the political will is mustered to do something, if it ever is. I agree that something needs to be done, but our political parties are embroiled in a constant partisan struggle to undercut and undermine each other, to the detriment of the country's future.

What I do believe would be a major mistake though (and said as much) is to attempt to implement a solution like universal health care without the authority to actually raise the revenue needed. That is not an excuse for inaction, it's just recognizing that the cure could be worse than the disease if we can't overcome the US public's desire to have government give them what they want without being willing to pay for it. That applies to many things, including the "Build Back Better" plan - and yes, I know that it is touted as an "investment", but it remains to be seen whether it will truly pay for itself in the long run. We must be willing to pay for it without passing the debt onto future generations, if the return on the investment proves to be less than expected.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on October 23, 2021, 05:51:17 PM
I think most Americans agree that the health care system needs improvement. Probably does need to be razed to the ground and designed intelligently. This would be difficult in normal times. In today's climate, it's impossible. Nota bene: this is a description not an excuse.

American policy-making is a succession of kludges

By Henry Farrell

October 9, 2013

The American public likes to complain about how difficult it is to understand U.S. public policy measures like Obamacare. Johns Hopkins political scientist Steve Teles argues in a recent article for National Affairs that instead of well-designed policies, we get kludgeocracy, a succession of semicoherent fixes to the policies that we already have. Kludgeocracy is worse in the U.S. than in many other electoral democracies because of underlying problems in our political system.

The most obvious reason why American institutions generate policy complexity is our system's numerous veto points. The separation of powers means that any proposal must generate agreement at three different stages — each house of Congress and the president. ... Most legislation has to pass through separate subcommittee and committee stages, each of which presents opportunities for legislators to stymie action. Many ambitious proposals are considered by Congress under "multiple referrals," in which more than one single committee is given jurisdiction. ... Finally, the super-majority requirement for breaking a filibuster in the Senate, combined with the intense partisanship that accompanies most major policy reforms, means that any single member can stall the progress of a piece of legislation, and a cohesive minority can kill it.

A superficial analysis would predict that this proliferation of veto points would lead to inaction, generating a systematic libertarian bias. In practice, however, every veto point functions more like a toll booth, with the toll-taker able to extract a price in exchange for his willingness to allow legislation to keep moving. ... many of our legislative toll-takers have a vested interest in the status quo. In exchange for their willingness to allow a bill to proceed, therefore, they often require that legislation leave their favored programs safe from substantive changes. Consequently, new ideas have to be layered over old programs rather than replace them — the textbook definition of a policy kludge. Second, the need to gain consent from so many actors makes attaining any degree of policy coherence difficult at best ... kludgeocracy is now self-generating, as its growth has created a "kludge industry" that feeds off the system's appetite for complexity.

Teles's analysis of the politics of kludge-piling has lessons for both left and right (his ideas have much in common with those of Hoover Institution political scientist Terry Moe, who writes eloquently about how most American legislative measures are in part designed by their enemies). Both argue about the size of the state, rather than whether the state is transparent and accountable. Kludges used to be part of the cost of doing politics, but they are now threatening to overwhelm the system that generates them. It's also worth reading Wonkblog's interview with Teles for further information.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on October 23, 2021, 08:25:28 PM
Gosh, I've had my motivations questioned in a much MUCH worse fashion (and others too). Much worse. Let's keep cool. I don't see vitriol but it's appropriate to point out when you feel someone is attacking your motives unnecessarily. I doubt it was meant to be insulting.
As I pointed out before, here in Japan, we have a system that covers everybody for everything. It's not that expensive for the customer and taxes are not even that high. It isn't perfect but it might even be a better model for the U.S. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 24, 2021, 12:42:56 AM
If someone here has an impression that I think changing the US healthcare system is easy they are mistaken. I am well aware of how hard it is. The US has tried to implement universal healthcare system for 100 years and it hasn't happened. That tells how hard it is. However, going to the Moon was hard too, but it was done.

SimonNZ keeps defending corporate media, but the truth is they haven't been the best advocates for universal healthcare, have they? Instead they do fearmongering: Who is going pay for it? How about the waiting times? How about the doctors you can see? Does it make the country Venezuela? They know the answers to those questions, but they keep asking anyway to uphold the narrative. MSM is one key factor in this. It is one lock that keeps change from happening. That's when the "amateur Youtube bobbleheads" come in providing alternate view.

When regular people (of which a large portion are poorly informed politically) have access to news coverage beyond MSM they can understand better the underlying narratives and the real tension in the society. Regular people on the right and left have many things in common: Both want higher taxes for the rich, both hate corruption, both want to end wars and both want better access to healthcare. The current political narrative keeps these people apart fighting each other over nonsensical cultural topics such as critical race theory in schools or whether mask mandates infringe someones freedom. The rich to whom the system is rigged for benefit from this status quo.

Americans need to learn more about the right-left axis. Americans are so mislead with this topic. Republicans call Biden a communist, which is hilariously comical. Even AOC isn't near of being a communist and Biden is several steps to the right of AOC. The most left label to Biden that makes any sense is "centrist", but even that is far fetched: Any politician who doesn't fight for universal healthcare or at least public option are radicals. The idea that it isn't a human right to have access to healthcare is radical, at least outside the US it is. The progressives are actually the centrists. Why? People their platform is very popular among regular people. They represent the real "center" of the population. It is only the misleading narrative of the MSM that mislabels them the radical left to fearmonger. They real radicals are the corporate Dems and Republicans. It is very radical to serve only big money doners. This is what Americans should understand and when they do, changing the country to a better one become easier. How about Nina Turner for president 2024? Hello somebody! At the moment Manchin and Sinema are the real president and VP. They run the show. The only question is which is which?  :P
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on October 24, 2021, 01:09:08 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 24, 2021, 12:42:56 AM
Have you watched Breaking Points on YouTube? They used to do The Hill Rising. Also Matt Taibbi's "Useful Idiots." Taibbi and his cohost review the Sunday political shows every Monday.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on October 24, 2021, 01:11:52 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 24, 2021, 12:42:56 AM

SimonNZ keeps defending corporate media,

Another artless an dishonest dodge. Please address the actual criticisms I've made in my actual posts.

If you want to know why you're treated as unserious this dodge is another reason why.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on October 24, 2021, 01:24:36 AM
Not stopping 'Stop the Steal:' Facebook Papers paint damning picture of company's role in insurrection
https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/22/business/january-6-insurrection-facebook-papers/index.html (https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/22/business/january-6-insurrection-facebook-papers/index.html)

"When Facebook executives posted messages publicly and internally condemning the riot, some employees pushed back, even suggesting Facebook might have had some culpability."

There are so many articles along this line now. I just wonder. People/news organizations are clamoring for more censorship and I don't see that other side of the coin expressed. Sure, we're in awful times. People in my family too went off the rails into trump-land, anti-mask/vax, q-anon. I hate it. But I worry when a blizzard of media seems to be asking for speech curbs. I'm not saying there isn't a problem but I also wonder if it's not a case of "too late to close the barn door." Or "the medium is the message." Social media is not much of a place for nuanced polite dialogue. I've even been called bad things on GMG. But the remedy might even be worse than the problem. Facebook is more than just a private publishing company in my view and I don't really wanting it telling people what they can say. Or maybe it should be broken up.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on October 24, 2021, 01:31:08 AM
Quote from: milk on October 24, 2021, 01:09:08 AM
Have you watched Breaking Points on YouTube? They used to do The Hill Rising. Also Matt Taibbi's "Useful Idiots." Taibbi and his cohost review the Sunday political shows every Monday.

Dude...this guy doesn't need more quick-hit punditry. He needs actual long form investigative journalism.

Or am I being "condescending"?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on October 24, 2021, 02:39:07 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on October 24, 2021, 01:31:08 AM
Dude...this guy doesn't need more quick-hit punditry. He needs actual long form investigative journalism.

Or am I being "condescending"?
Taibbi does long form journalism if you read his substack. Glenn Greenwald does also (to add another "crank"). I agree that it's good to read widely and in-depth.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 24, 2021, 02:55:42 AM
Quote from: milk on October 24, 2021, 01:09:08 AM
Have you watched Breaking Points on YouTube? They used to do The Hill Rising. Also Matt Taibbi's "Useful Idiots." Taibbi and his cohost review the Sunday political shows every Monday.

Not really. There are so many to choose from. This year I have followed US politics less because I want to think about it less, but when I watch something it is mostly Secular Talk (Kyle Kulinski), David Pakman and TYT, althou I am more careful with TYT after their ridiculous feud with Jimmy Dore. I stopped watching Jimmy Dore who has become a total ivermectin grifter. In my opinion TYT has been good lately. Maybe the feud with Jimmy Dore made to put their act up while Jimmy Dore wants to get more right wing audience.

Quote from: SimonNZ on October 24, 2021, 01:11:52 AM
Another artless an dishonest dodge. Please address the actual criticisms I've made in my actual posts.

If you want to know why you're treated as unserious this dodge is another reason why.

Sorry if I have misunderstood your posts here, but for me it has been quite clear you don't value independent commentators and think corporate mainstream media are the real professionals. Your criticism seems to be that the like of Kyle Kulinski are amateurish morons. Well, these people work from morning to the evening earning their living doing it. That makes it professional, doesn't it? Also, these guys get things right unlike corporate media.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on October 24, 2021, 03:04:50 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 24, 2021, 02:55:42 AM


Sorry if I have misunderstood your posts here, but for me it has been quite clear you don't value independent commentators and think corporate mainstream media are the real professionals.

And again:

Quote from: SimonNZ on October 24, 2021, 01:11:52 AM
Another artless an dishonest dodge. Please address the actual criticisms I've made in my actual posts.

If you want to know why you're treated as unserious this dodge is another reason why.

Any of your "+1" defenders who think you are being unjustly maligned please speak up now.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 24, 2021, 03:08:16 AM
look again. I edited my post while you were posting. this is ridiculous. what do you want me to say?

I am not here to say what you want. I am here to say what I want.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on October 24, 2021, 03:11:13 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 24, 2021, 02:55:42 AM
Your criticism seems to be that the like of Kyle Kulinski are amateurish morons. Well, these people work from morning to the evening earning their living doing it. That makes it professional, doesn't it?

Fuck no.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 24, 2021, 03:20:14 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on October 24, 2021, 03:11:13 AM
Fuck no.

That doesn't help me understand what you think. You not agreeing with someone who works his ass off doesn't make it amateurish. Someone earning millions in the MSM doesn't make anyone much more than a bought propagandist (because you are supposed to uphold certain narratives), a mouthpiece for the rich. These MSM people laughed at the idea of Trump becoming president before Rep primary early on in 2016, while Kyle Kulinski WARNED about the possibility that Trump may win.  How is that for "fuck no"? Sure Kyle is wrong from time to time* (because predicting the future always correctly is near impossible, chaos theory and alll), but at least he admits it and corrects himself. unlike MSM.

* Kyle was wrong for example about the progressives. He thought they would fight harder, but it turns out having correct political views doesn't mean you are a leader or fighter. He has admitted this very openly. That is honesty.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on October 24, 2021, 03:31:50 AM
I've raised a half dozen issues with you in my previous posts. Answer them or deflect. Either way the "+1s" will be with you for reasons I simply cannot fucking fathom.

Answer my previous posts.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 24, 2021, 03:34:06 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on October 24, 2021, 03:31:50 AM
I've raised a half dozen issues with you in my previous posts. Answer them or deflect. Either way the "+1s" will be with you for reasons I simply cannot fucking fathom.

Answer my previous posts.

Can you at least list the numbers of those posts of yours? You must have made hundreds over the years. Are you expecting me to spend hours looking for your old posts for unanswered questions I didn't know I HAVE TO answer?

I'm sorry, if you feel jealous for me getting +1 from a few kind members. I'm not here for popularity contest. I just wish everybody can say what they want to say. That's all.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on October 24, 2021, 03:38:37 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 24, 2021, 03:34:06 AM
Can you at least list the numbers of those posts of yours? You must have made hundreds over the years. Are you expecting me to spend hours looking for your old post for unanswered questions I didn't know I HAVE TO answer?

Liar. The last pages since your last iteration of woe-is-me-everybody-is-mean-to-me..start there. Engage with my replies rather than deflecting because you've feel emboldened by some "+1" posts.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 24, 2021, 03:45:46 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on October 24, 2021, 03:38:37 AM
Liar. The last pages since your last iteration of woe-is-me-everybody-is-mean-to-me..start there. Engage with my replies rather than deflecting because you've feel emboldened by some "+1" posts.

Okay, but now I have to go. I look at your post later and try to answer them.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on October 24, 2021, 03:52:16 AM
Oh the irony.

Because my replies have been about how you don't actually read and take in the replies to your posts.

Plus one, baby, plus one.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on October 24, 2021, 03:59:21 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on October 24, 2021, 03:04:50 AM
And again:

Any of your "+1" defenders who think you are being unjustly maligned please speak up now.
No one needs to be maligned here. It's a mistake. I don't agree with any particular person's content all of the time and some none of the time.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on October 24, 2021, 04:04:44 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 24, 2021, 03:34:06 AMI just wish everybody can say what they want to say. That's all.
It's more interesting and fun when people disagree. I like hearing views I disagree with if they are honestly derived. I even miss Todd, although he was a bit belligerent at times and I rarely agreed with him.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on October 24, 2021, 04:10:26 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 23, 2021, 05:51:17 PM
...

The most obvious reason why American institutions generate policy complexity is our system's numerous veto points. The separation of powers means that any proposal must generate agreement at three different stages — each house of Congress and the president. ... Most legislation has to pass through separate subcommittee and committee stages, each of which presents opportunities for legislators to stymie action. Many ambitious proposals are considered by Congress under "multiple referrals," in which more than one single committee is given jurisdiction. ... Finally, the super-majority requirement for breaking a filibuster in the Senate, combined with the intense partisanship that accompanies most major policy reforms, means that any single member can stall the progress of a piece of legislation, and a cohesive minority can kill it.
...

As I've said before on other forum and possibly this one, the USA has too many checks & balances.

President <-> Senate <-> House of Reps <-> Supreme Court.

It was a formulation designed designed under that naïve assumption that there would be no political parties, an assumption that was effectively trashed while Washington was still President.

In fact I would say that the excessive checks & balances not only didn't prevent political parties but necessitated a rigid two-party system in order to allow simpler, binary choices to get things past those checks & balances.

Yes, obviously the Senate filibuster thing is another huge and ridiculous obstacle to getting anything done.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 24, 2021, 07:00:00 AM
So I suppose this is one of the post You wanted answers to?

Quote from: SimonNZ on October 23, 2021, 02:14:40 PM
See, this has been explained, and the fact that you have to ask it again is part of the problem. You hear people disagreeing but don't take in their reasons, just that there is pushback,.

I am not a child to whom things are "explained" (force fed). I have to find the answers to problems myself.

Quote from: SimonNZ on October 23, 2021, 02:14:40 PMYou think things are black and white and solutions easy, when every topic you address is in fact massively complicated and understand and knowing all the moving parts and theories and the nature of past attempts at solutions any one of the - to say nothing of navigating a way through them - requires a full library's worth of reading to have the certainty and knowledge you believe it is your right to be recognised as having.
On the contrary! I oppose the kind of populistic politics where answers are "easy", because most of the time answers are complex. That's what competent politicians are for: Doing the complex solutions. However, particularly in the case of US politics the problems is that the politicians are competent in enriching themselves rather than serving their constituents and they don't even want to find solutions. They are happy with the status quo.

Quote from: SimonNZ on October 23, 2021, 02:14:40 PMIf I acted like I knew any political topic completely (let alone based only on just a smattering of punditry) I'd deserve whatever "condescension" came my way. I've deserved ot for even less than that.
Kyle Kulinski says people who listen to him are super-educated politically.  ;D That explains my arrogant style. Seriously, many problems in the US politics are quite simple because of the utter corruption. It is kind of black and white because of that. Especially for people living outside the US it is quite easy to see in what direction the country should go (to left toward social democracy. How much is up to debate). Even if the solutions can be politically near impossible and extremely difficult to achieve, it is often easy to see, what should be done.

Quote from: SimonNZ on October 23, 2021, 02:14:40 PMNobody is saying you cant communicate , but the answer to this "Why?" is that you need a better sense of just how much you still have to learn.

I have a lot to learn, but so has everybody else. However, some answers are very clear even if we don't know everything. In fact, we need to be able to find solutions without knowing everything, because knowing everything is impossible. As an INTJ/P I am willing to change my my mind, but it takes very convincing and logical evidence. That is the difference from being stubborn. Being right is very important for me so I will change my mind when needed to be more right.

Quote from: SimonNZ on October 23, 2021, 02:14:40 PMWill you take this on board this time, or yet again deflect to suggest its about something other than what I'm trying to tell you as directly as possible?

Well, now I am addressing your questions.

Quote from: SimonNZ on October 23, 2021, 02:14:40 PMWhy do I keep scratching at this? Because it worries me that this is the way many now get their so-called ?news": via amateur Youtube bobbleheads with their uncomplicated faith in their own certainty and easily acquired absolute truths, and I'm looking for some sign of hope - and I'm not seeing it, here or elsewhere.

I addressed this part already. Operating via Youtube doesn't make anyone an amateur bobblehead. As an INTJ/P I don't look how someone looks or how much they make money. I don't care about ranks. I listen to people what they say and I analyse how much they make sense, how sincere they are, what are their biases and agendas etc. Saying that only big media corporations can do quality reporting is like saying the bigger budget a movie has the better movie. It doesn't work like that. Small budget movies can be really good. So can independent Youtube "bobblehead."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 24, 2021, 07:03:36 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on October 24, 2021, 04:10:26 AM
As I've said before on other forum and possibly this one, the USA has too many checks & balances.

President <-> Senate <-> House of Reps <-> Supreme Court.

It was a formulation designed designed under that naïve assumption that there would be no political parties, an assumption that was effectively trashed while Washington was still President.

In fact I would say that the excessive checks & balances not only didn't prevent political parties but necessitated a rigid two-party system in order to allow simpler, binary choices to get things past those checks & balances.

Yes, obviously the Senate filibuster thing is another huge and ridiculous obstacle to getting anything done.

Interesting theory.  ;)

I believe filibuster was originally introduced to protect white priviledge, but has since become a wall to block all kind of progressive legistlation.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on October 24, 2021, 08:42:26 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 24, 2021, 07:03:36 AM
Interesting theory.  ;)

I believe filibuster was originally introduced to protect white priviledge, but has since become a wall to block all kind of progressive legistlation.

Not really. It began accidentally and evolved gradually. The cloture rule, originally 2/3 of Senate, emerged in the last century, and currently it requires 60/100.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on October 24, 2021, 09:29:44 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 24, 2021, 07:00:00 AM
Saying that only big media corporations can do quality reporting is like saying the bigger budget a movie has the better movie. It doesn't work like that. Small budget movies can be really good. So can independent Youtube "bobblehead."
Yep, truth and artistic quality are independent of big budgets or established corporations. They are good for helping mass-production of those things, but not those things themselves. Those things are both very much originating from individuals, and can clash hard if they are part of an organization which has certain expectations.

There also may be a sort of shift in power over time with news commentary. This is a good thing. We don't want the same legacy news media organizations forever, you have to make changes over time, and gradually the most popular news commentators may end up having more institutional power (I think they get more overall viewers nowadays, but don't have the money/connections quite yet).  And once they get stale, way in the future, then bring in the new people.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on October 24, 2021, 09:55:42 AM
Quote from: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on October 24, 2021, 08:42:26 AM
Not really. It began accidentally and evolved gradually. The cloture rule, originally 2/3 of Senate, emerged in the last century, and currently it requires 60/100.

So as I understand 60 votes is necessary to bring closure on a bill.  What is grotesque is that now the Senate minority leader must only announce the intention to filibuster in order to filibuster -- no need to actually stand and talk for hours & hours. What utter nonsense. ::)

(In Canada an MP must actually stand and talk.  Also, closure can be enforced by a simple majority vote.)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on October 24, 2021, 12:52:52 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 24, 2021, 07:00:00 AM
Operating via Youtube doesn't make anyone an amateur bobblehead. As an INTJ/P I don't look how someone looks or how much they make money. I don't care about ranks. I listen to people what they say and I analyse how much they make sense, how sincere they are, what are their biases and agendas etc. Saying that only big media corporations can do quality reporting is like saying the bigger budget a movie has the better movie. It doesn't work like that. Small budget movies can be really good. So can independent Youtube "bobblehead."

This will be my last post to you, hopefully ever, because you are  simply not hearing what I or others are saying, but misinterpreting it to fit your own narrative.

Its not a matter of small budget vs big budget and I've never once said it is, and to say I have is a lie. There are plenty of small privately owned newspapers that have done amazing investigative journalism and exposées and been rewarded with Pulitzers and are praised by their much larger peers. But what you are talking about is mere punditry, opinion on the journalism not ther journalism itself. You're comparing apples with oranges and its not because of budget. Its mistaking punditry as journalism that is the problem here, as I've tried to get through to you so very many times, and if you let go of the safety and black and white certainty of the punditry and sought out more actual journalism, you'd be better informed and you wouldn't make the silly mistake of thinking the two are the same. It isn't News, its just the guy at the end of the bar.

Quote from: 71 dB on October 24, 2021, 07:00:00 AM

Kyle Kulinski says people who listen to him are super-educated politically.  ;D That explains my arrogant style.

Yes.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on October 24, 2021, 02:55:24 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 24, 2021, 07:00:00 AM
Kyle Kulinski says people who listen to him are super-educated politically.  ;D That explains my arrogant style.

Quote from: SimonNZ on October 24, 2021, 12:52:52 PM
Yes.

That really says it all about Poju's participation on this thread.

The good thing, I suppose is: that the +6-or-so who were missing something as to why the adults in the room condescend to our Poju, cannot miss it now.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on October 24, 2021, 08:17:04 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 24, 2021, 02:55:24 PM
That really says it all about Poju's participation on this thread.

The good thing, I suppose is: that the +6-or-so who were missing something as to why the adults in the room condescend to our Poju, cannot miss it now.
Even if there is arrogance (I see glimpses of it but am not so familiar with the discussions so probably don't see it all maybe?), there is also self-criticism and self-reflection, which I find entirely lacking in many people's posts in the Politics thread. Not sure why- either a  lack of self-awareness or just complete unwillingness to play defense (only willing to play offense), or maybe something else? It is interesting, though, to see the contrast in approaches.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 25, 2021, 01:25:59 AM
I don't know if the lack of investigative journalism is the biggest problem. I think the issue is the lack of honest journalism. Masses don't even bother to read the fruits of investigative journalism, but they are easily mislead with dishonest misinformation.

Youtube as a media is perhaps too young to have Pulitzers winners. Maybe someone such as Jordan Chariton (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_Chariton) will win a prize like that someday?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on October 25, 2021, 01:31:11 AM
Quote from: greg on October 24, 2021, 08:17:04 PM
Even if there is arrogance (I see glimpses of it but am not so familiar with the discussions so probably don't see it all maybe?), there is also self-criticism and self-reflection, which I find entirely lacking in many people's posts in the Politics thread. Not sure why- either a  lack of self-awareness or just complete unwillingness to play defense (only willing to play offense), or maybe something else? It is interesting, though, to see the contrast in approaches.
And I took that, with the smiley emoji, as a joke while the "adults" took it without irony. Maybe I'm seeing self-depreciating irony where there isn't? I have to admit I'm rather lazy and don't pay full attention to what people are doing much of the time. Even when someone insults me, I'm willing to continue to engage politely with them. I have done it and I notice some particular others never do it. I'm willing to forgive too. I've been wrong before, so be it. Yes: I agree with you on this. Some people here aren't given very much to admitting other possibilities. This isn't about content; it's about style, attitude, perspective, and communication.     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on October 25, 2021, 02:04:35 AM
Quote from: milk on October 25, 2021, 01:31:11 AM
And I took that, with the smiley emoji, as a joke while the "adults" took it without irony.

We've seen it said multiple times without the emoji. We've seen it yelled in all caps and swearing and without the emoji We've seen him start threads the entire subject of which is demanding to know why we don't recognize that he has "the knowledge" and is hyper educated about American politics from watching a bunch of Kyle videos and why therefor we don't admit we should be deferring to him, brainwashed as we are. Multiple threads started just for that.

I can provide links if you really need them.

You mentioned how good he's been over the last year. I think you'll find that was "moderator-assisted".
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: ritter on October 25, 2021, 03:11:41 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on October 25, 2021, 02:04:35 AM
We've seen it said multiple times without the emoji. We've seen it yelled in all caps and swearing and without the emoji We've seen him start threads the entire subject of which is demanding to know why we don't recognize that he has "the knowledge" and is hyper educated about American politics from watching a bunch of Kyle videos and why therefor we don't admit we should be deferring to him, brainwashed as we are. Multiple threads started just for that.

I can provide links if you really need them.

You mentioned how good he's been over the last year. I think you'll find that was "moderator-assisted".
I steer clear of this thread these days (I was never particularly active in it anyway), but now that "plus ones" seem to be in fashion, it's SimonNZ who gets my +1... ;)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 25, 2021, 03:58:57 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on October 25, 2021, 02:04:35 AM
He has "the knowledge" and is hyper educated about American politics from watching a bunch of Kyle videos...

Not hyper-educated, but super-educated.  :) This is clearly a joke from my part, because Kyle uses it and his direct self-confidence amuses me. In a way he is right, because most people follow news sources so bad someone like Kyle is in fact super-good in comparison. You forget that most people don't read well crafted articles by Pulitzer-winning people. Most people follow the likes of Tucker Carlson, people who are propagandists, not investigative journalists.

Maybe I don't know anything. I have used quite a lot of time in resent years following US poltics so I thought I knew something. Anyway, I don't follow US politics anymore as intensively as I did and I don't even care so much anymore. The US for me is just a rich third World country with third World country problems. If it wasn't for English language used in that country or some cultural achievements of epic proportion such as the movies of George Lucas and Steven Spielberg, I wouldn't be that interested of the country to begin with. Even that legacy is now being destroyed by Disney's "wokeness" so that I have zero intrerest of Indiana Jones 5. Now even the UK is going downhill with Boris Johnson. What is it with these English speaking countries making them so crazy politically? At least Australia and New Zealand are still voices of sanity as far as I know. Keep it up down there!  0:)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on October 25, 2021, 04:59:31 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 25, 2021, 03:58:57 AM
Maybe I don't know anything. I have used quite a lot of time in resent years following US poltics so I thought I knew something. Anyway, I don't follow US politics anymore as intensively as I did and I don't even care so much anymore. The US for me is just a rich third World country with third World country problems. If it wasn't for English language used in that country or some cultural achievements of epic proportion such as the movies of George Lucas and Steven Spielberg, I wouldn't be that interested of the country to begin with. Even that legacy is now being destroyed by Disney's "wokeness" so that I have zero intrerest of Indiana Jones 5. Now even the UK is going downhill with Boris Johnson. What is it with these English speaking countries making them so crazy politically? At least Australia and New Zealand are still voices of sanity as far as I know. Keep it up down there!  0:)

As I Canadian I have visited the USA many times over many decades on account of both business and pleasure.  I have followed US federal politics with a certain interest for a long time too.  And also look closely at the American system of government.  Things have gotten crazier than I would ever have though possible 'till recently.

I was gravely shock by the election of Donald Trump in '16 -- or maybe rather that he could be elected.  It undermined my great respect for Americans in general.  Worse, it undermined my respect for the human race, such as it was.

By now I'm not surprised by the rise of populism and would-be autocrat leaders.  We see democracy going down hill so many place, viz. Hungary, Turkey, Brazil, Philippines, etc.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Jo498 on October 25, 2021, 05:21:30 AM
The demise or "wokization" of 1970s-2000s popular culture that was mostly trashy even at its peak some decades ago before the last drop of possible profit got milked out of these franchises is certainly the least of the problems the Western world is facing now or will have to face eventually. It is also something comparably easy to fix (if one thinks it needs fixing). Someone just needs to make different movies.
That's why we should be happy about classical music and literature. It's old but still with us, cannot be changed by replaced characters or whatever we don't like etc.
They can't take that away from you so easily.

Granting that Trump was more or less regularly elected and then voted out after 4 years, I'd actually take that as a good sign. The system is open enough both to admit an unusual candidate and then get rid of him again. I fear that many other decisions are not that open anymore, e.g. the stunningly totalitarian measures many countries have been taking "for health reasons" in the last almost two years. I am shocked and depressed more by this than by any other development I witnessed in the last 35 years, certainly more than by any Trump or Bolsonaro (admittedly, these two are very far away from where I live).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on October 25, 2021, 05:48:02 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on October 25, 2021, 05:21:30 AM
The demise or "wokization" of 1970s-2000s popular culture that was mostly trashy even at its peak some decades ago before the last drop of possible profit got milked out of these franchises is certainly the least of the problems the Western world is facing now or will have to face eventually. It is also something comparably easy to fix (if one thinks it needs fixing). Someone just needs to make different movies.
That's why we should be happy about classical music and literature. It's old but still with us, cannot be changed by replaced characters or whatever we don't like etc.
They can't take that away from you so easily.

Granting that Trump was more or less regularly elected and then voted out after 4 years, I'd actually take that as a good sign. The system is open enough both to admit an unusual candidate and then get rid of him again. I fear that many other decisions are not that open anymore, e.g. the stunningly totalitarian measures many countries have been taking "for health reasons" in the last almost two years. I am shocked and depressed more by this than by any other development I witnessed in the last 35 years, certainly more than by any Trump or Bolsonaro (admittedly, these two are very far away from where I live).

Long since I concluded that human beings are ignorant and/or irrational and/or stupid in varying degrees.  What I underestimated 'till recently is the ability of populist demagogues to exploit worst combinations of the attributes.

My Venn diagram works better than every ...

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on October 25, 2021, 05:56:14 AM
Quote from: milk on October 25, 2021, 01:31:11 AM
I have to admit I'm rather lazy and don't pay full attention to what people are doing much of the time.

Obviously, nothing wrong with this, esp. on this thread.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on October 25, 2021, 05:59:29 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 25, 2021, 03:58:57 AM
Not hyper-educated, but super-educated.  :) This is clearly a joke from my part, because Kyle uses it and his direct self-confidence amuses me. In a way he is right, because most people follow news sources so bad someone like Kyle is in fact super-good in comparison. You forget that most people don't read well crafted articles by Pulitzer-winning people. Most people follow the likes of Tucker Carlson, people who are propagandists, not investigative journalists.

It's been pointed out to you repeatedly that there is no virtue in your subscribing to Kyle, who no less than Tucker Carlson is a propagandist, not a journalist.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on October 25, 2021, 06:01:38 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on October 25, 2021, 05:21:30 AM
The demise or "wokization" of 1970s-2000s popular culture that was mostly trashy even at its peak some decades ago before the last drop of possible profit got milked out of these franchises is certainly the least of the problems the Western world is facing now or will have to face eventually. It is also something comparably easy to fix (if one thinks it needs fixing). Someone just needs to make different movies.
That's why we should be happy about classical music and literature. It's old but still with us, cannot be changed by replaced characters or whatever we don't like etc.
They can't take that away from you so easily.

Granting that Trump was more or less regularly elected and then voted out after 4 years, I'd actually take that as a good sign. The system is open enough both to admit an unusual candidate and then get rid of him again. I fear that many other decisions are not that open anymore, e.g. the stunningly totalitarian measures many countries have been taking "for health reasons" in the last almost two years. I am shocked and depressed more by this than by any other development I witnessed in the last 35 years, certainly more than by any Trump or Bolsonaro (admittedly, these two are very far away from where I live).

Of course, notwithstanding the fact that Trump lost the election, we are far from done with him.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on October 25, 2021, 06:02:55 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on October 25, 2021, 05:21:30 AM
e.g. the stunningly totalitarian measures many countries have been taking "for health reasons" in the last almost two years. I am shocked and depressed more by this than by any other development I witnessed in the last 35 years, certainly more than by any Trump or Bolsonaro (admittedly, these two are very far away from where I live).

Which totalitarian measures?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on October 25, 2021, 06:37:54 AM
Lev Parnas Is a Reminder—and Warning—of Trump's Sleazy Corruption (https://www.thebulwark.com/lev-parnas-is-a-reminder-and-warning-of-trumps-sleazy-corruption/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on October 25, 2021, 06:41:58 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 25, 2021, 06:37:54 AM
Lev Parnas Is a Reminder—and Warning—of Trump's Sleazy Corruption (https://www.thebulwark.com/lev-parnas-is-a-reminder-and-warning-of-trumps-sleazy-corruption/)

Quote from: Kimberly WehleIt should go without saying that it's bad for the American system of government if a sitting president can use his unparalleled national security, law enforcement, financial, and diplomatic power to strongarm his way into more time in office. Yet that's precisely what Donald Trump tried to do, and thus far there has been zero accountability for it. He was impeached, but Senate Republicans blocked his conviction. Far from distancing itself from him because of his Ukraine malversation, the GOP has stuck with Trump through the pandemic, through his attempt to steal the election, through the riot he incited at the Capitol, and through the first ten months of his conspiracy-theory-spreading ex-presidency.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on October 25, 2021, 06:47:16 AM
https://www.yahoo.com/news/exclusive-jan-6-protest-organizers-003326225.html

As the House investigation into the Jan. 6 attack heats up, some of the planners of the pro-Trump rallies that took place in Washington, D.C., have begun communicating with congressional investigators and sharing new information about what happened when the former president's supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol. Two of these people have spoken to Rolling Stone extensively in recent weeks and detailed explosive allegations that multiple members of Congress were intimately involved in planning both Trump's efforts to overturn his election loss and the Jan. 6 events that turned violent.

Rolling Stone separately confirmed a third person involved in the main Jan. 6 rally in D.C. has communicated with the committee. This is the first report that the committee is hearing major new allegations from potential cooperating witnesses. While there have been prior indications that members of Congress were involved, this is also the first account detailing their purported role and its scope. The two sources also claim they interacted with members of Trump's team, including former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, who they describe as having had an opportunity to prevent the violence.
...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 25, 2021, 06:56:35 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on October 25, 2021, 04:59:31 AM
As I Canadian I have visited the USA many times over many decades on account of both business and pleasure.

I have been to the US (Florida) only once in 1982 when I was 11 years old. At that time the country seemed a wonderland: Disneyworld, Space Center, Sea World, warm sunny weather, 16 TV channels (Finland had 3 TV channels at that time I think), Pacman everywhere and of course as much Reese's Peanut Butter Cups one can eat!  $:)

Quote from: Fëanor on October 25, 2021, 04:59:31 AMI have followed US federal politics with a certain interest for a long time too.  And also look closely at the American system of government.  Things have gotten crazier than I would ever have though possible 'till recently.

I was gravely shock by the election of Donald Trump in '16 -- or maybe rather that he could be elected.  It undermined my great respect for Americans in general.  Worse, it undermined my respect for the human race, such as it was.

Trump's victory in 2016 was the starting point for my interest in the US politics. I was totally shocked by the result. I can still remember how I woke up in the morning and checked the news for election results expecting to see Hillary as the winner. Bang! WTF?? Trump won? What? My mother was also badly shocked by the result. In general Europeans had difficulty of understanding the result.

I had thought ONLY Republicans are bad and that Hillary would genuinely be a GOOD president. I even wrote that opinion on this forum in 2016 before the election. I didn't know about Bernie Sanders and I was surprised to see some member here even support him. I didn't know Hillary is corrupt and hated. I didn't know she doesn't really care about other people unless they donate money.  I learned all of this when I started to follow the US politics more closely and I found the "alternative" voices beyond the MSM.

In Finland the general idea of politics is to improve the country and the lives of voters from rich to poor. In the US politics is about the careers of the politicians and getting richer is the main goal. The lives of the bottom 99 % doesn't really matter, because they don't make large donations.

20 years ago I didn't watch the movies of Michael Moore. I thought the dude is out of his mind making sensational movies out of nothing. I should have taken him much more seriously and watch his movies. I thought his movies were about the excess obesity of American when he actually correctly criticized the brutal US healthcare system. Now that know better (or at least I think I know) I keep Michael Moore in very high esteem. He is one of the best voices of reason in the country imho.

Quote from: Fëanor on October 25, 2021, 04:59:31 AMBy now I'm not surprised by the rise of populism and would-be autocrat leaders.  We see democracy going down hill so many place, viz. Hungary, Turkey, Brazil, Philippines, etc.

People are stupid and ignorant. We want these dictator wanna-bees in powers. We will loose our freedom and then we must fight for it again. That makes people wiser for 100-300 years and then this cycle will repeat itself. We are that stupid. Better enjoy our freedom while we can. If I am lucky I will be dead before Finland becomes a dictatorship. Finland has very strong democracy. Undoing it will takes decades, I hope...  ???
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 25, 2021, 07:28:27 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 25, 2021, 05:59:29 AM
It's been pointed out to you repeatedly that there is no virtue in your subscribing to Kyle, who no less than Tucker Carlson is a propagandist, not a journalist.

You are not wrong, but it is more nyanced than that. All propagandists are not the same. First of all Kyle admits being a propagandists and openly says his bias is on the left. It s clear from everyone what his propaganda is about. If you want all Americans to have access to healthcare you agree with him. If you think healthcare is a priviledge of the rich, you disagree with him, but either way is is very clear for everyone. Hosts on Fox News are not like that. They pretent of caring about their audience and are willing to mislead them.

Tucker Carlson creates doubt against Corona Vaccines with his rhetoric. Kyle Kulinski is encouraging his audience to take vaccines basing his opinions on studies done on vaccines, statistics and scientific knowledge. Which one of them do you think is more harmful propaganda? Propagandists are not the same. You can do propaganda for bad and good things. I am sorry Karl, but I feel Kyle Kulinski does propaganda for good things. I can't say the same for Tucker Carlson. In fact, I think Tucker Carlson is a very dangerous man.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 25, 2021, 07:44:32 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on October 25, 2021, 06:02:55 AM
Which totalitarian measures?

I'm asking the same. Some people have funny ideas about totalitarian measures. Mask mandates and lockdowns in the middle of the worst pandemic in 100 years are totalitarian measures? Really? I call it common sense. Should we have let the pandemic run wild filling hospitals of patients causing the collapse of the healthcare system?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on October 25, 2021, 07:47:17 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 25, 2021, 07:28:27 AM
You are not wrong, but it is more nuanced than that. All propagandists are not the same.

Fair enough.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 25, 2021, 07:59:21 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 25, 2021, 07:47:17 AM
Fair enough.

Very good.  0:)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Jo498 on October 25, 2021, 09:20:19 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on October 25, 2021, 06:02:55 AM
Which totalitarian measures?
Shutting down almost everything for months or a year because of a flu? Extending state of emergency? Forcing people to get a dubious vaccination (that would never have been admitted by the agencies 5 years ago) or lose their jobs. And so on, on the flimsiest of pretexts. All stuff we have not had in the West since the 1940s...
You certainly know what I am referring to. I guess you are fine with it and what one likes cannot be totalitarian...

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on October 25, 2021, 09:27:59 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on October 25, 2021, 09:20:19 AM
Shutting down almost everything for months or a year because of a flu? Extending state of emergency? Forcing people to get a dubious vaccination (that would never have been admitted by the agencies 5 years ago) or lose their jobs. And so on, on the flimsiest of pretexts. All stuff we have not had in the West since the 1940s...
You certainly know what I am referring to. I guess you are fine with it and what one likes cannot be totalitarian...



a flu? Well, you've gauged yourself there.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Jo498 on October 25, 2021, 09:36:18 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 25, 2021, 07:44:32 AM
I'm asking the same. Some people have funny ideas about totalitarian measures. Mask mandates and lockdowns in the middle of the worst pandemic in 100 years are totalitarian measures? Really? I call it common sense. Should we have let the pandemic run wild filling hospitals of patients causing the collapse of the healthcare system?
In Germany there was never even the slightest danger of a collapse. (And even if there was such a danger, there would have been other preventive measures that would not take away fundamental liberties.) The Cov patients were on average low single digit percentages of the patient in hospitals here.
Overall the stats now show very little differences in mortality both to bad flu years (like 2017/18, I think) and also very little differences between countries/regions with draconian and countries with lax measures.

People die, that's a fact of life. There are some moderate measures like masks or washing hands (as well as all kinds of recommendationd or voluntary measures) that can be acceptable. But not shutting down businesses, forcing people to vaccinate, letting them lose their jobs etc. Not with a disease barely deadlier than the flu (if at all).

Until yesterday the media would have been outraged at higher insurance fees for fat people or motorcyclists or any other measures to reduce risks or healthcare costs. We all understood that there were risks involved in almost everything we did. (I remember well how media made fun of people being afraid of terror attacks after 2001 or any of the other incidents in the last 20 years by quoting stats that more people died doing domestic chores than from terror attacks.) Now people are employing literally Nazi phrases to exclude the "unvaccinated" or threaten that they would not be treated. It's overall the most disgusting and outrageous thing I have witnessed in almost 50 years of life.

If you don't see that how easily the whole world has slipped into panic mode and people agreed to all kind of silly measures is the most ominous thing wrt personal freedom that happened in the West since many decades and that a buffoon like Trump is a "danger to democracy" you are deluded. If you think the totalitarians are easy to spot because of the jackboots and funny uniforms, they will not do us such a favor.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Jo498 on October 25, 2021, 09:41:10 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 25, 2021, 09:27:59 AM
a flu? Well, you've gauged yourself there.
The danger and deadliness of Covid is roughly in the same order of magnitude as the flu (the flu is quite dangerous to the same frail or old people Cov is dangerous for). Twice as dangerous is still the same order of magnitude. But even 10 times as dangerous would hardly have justified the measures we had in many countries.
With the same arguments one could enforce a speed limit of 30 mph everywhere. Certainly fewer people would die. But it would also become silly to have powerful cars being able to do 75 mph.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on October 25, 2021, 10:24:02 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 25, 2021, 03:58:57 AM
The US for me is just a rich third World country with third World country problems.
This is an interesting take. Earlier in the thread, it was referred to as a third World country (which I totally disagree with), but saying it is a rich third World country is a bit more of a nuanced, original interpretation. Either that, or a totally retarded one.  :D

To me it's a first world country with an unfortunate class gap. Maybe it isn't first world any more, idk, but the decades before the great recession I'd definitely say it's first world because anyone who isn't a total screwup could "make it." Nowadays, not so much.

And just from my observations, there's two really significant things that explains why the US has higher poverty rates- 1) lack of social support- in our culture, it's common for parents to kick kids out of the house at the age of 18 and never help them. 2) drug addiction, large supply of drugs everywhere

There's also a lot of really dumb people... I mean, if you were actually growing up around these people, you'd see why they could never make it, the problem is entirely themselves. They're just losers, I've been around kids in school that openly said they get in trouble with the police for fun and feel like they are destined for prison. In that case, you can't blame the US for not supporting them. Is that rare in Finland?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 25, 2021, 11:51:17 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on October 25, 2021, 09:20:19 AM
Shutting down almost everything for months or a year because of a flu? Extending state of emergency? Forcing people to get a dubious vaccination (that would never have been admitted by the agencies 5 years ago) or lose their jobs. And so on, on the flimsiest of pretexts. All stuff we have not had in the West since the 1940s...
You certainly know what I am referring to. I guess you are fine with it and what one likes cannot be totalitarian...

According to the CDC, flu-related deaths between the years of 1986 and 2007 ranged from 3,000 to 49,000. Since 2010, the flu-related death rate has been between 12,000 and 61,000 annually, with the highest season being 2017–2018 and the lowest being 2011–2012.

https://www.verywellhealth.com/deaths-from-flu-2633829

Covid-19 related deaths have been one or two order of magnitudes bigger in the US compared to flu. Until a year ago there was no vaccines against Covid-19 which has cause significantly larger burden on the healthcare system than flu does. That's why the measures against Covid-19. The vaccines are not "dubious". They were tested and now approved. We have also seen how the vaccines work: They reduce the risk of getting Covid by a factor of 2, the risk of hospitalization by factor of 10+ and risk of dying of Covid by factor of 7. The side effects of the vaccines (sore arm for a couple or days, maybe some fever etc.) are a small price to pay for the protection. We haven't had a pandemic like this in 100 years. That's the reason why we have not seen this stuff since 1940's.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: krummholz on October 25, 2021, 12:01:32 PM
Quote from: Jo498 on October 25, 2021, 09:41:10 AM
The danger and deadliness of Covid is roughly in the same order of magnitude as the flu (the flu is quite dangerous to the same frail or old people Cov is dangerous for).

Do you have a source for that? The WHO estimates that the mortality rate of COVID is 10 times or more greater than that of most strains of influenza. So, perhaps one order of magnitude greater.

Of course, if you put everything on a logarithmic scale, then it doesn't seem so much worse - ONLY one order of magnitude, not two or three or four. ;)

QuoteBut even 10 times as dangerous would hardly have justified the measures we had in many countries.
With the same arguments one could enforce a speed limit of 30 mph everywhere. Certainly fewer people would die. But it would also become silly to have powerful cars being able to do 75 mph.

To me the difference is between risks that I take for myself, and those that I take that endanger other people. I like to fly a small airplane, which is risky to me, but the risk to other people is extremely small - much less than the risk I pose to others when driving a car, if I go substantially over the speed limit. People infected with SARS-CoV-2 pose a significant risk to other people, hence it's justified to impose a mandatory quarantine. I tend to agree with you about closing down businesses on a massive scale, but mostly because the way it has been done in the West is not very effective: partial lockdowns over a period of months do more to damage the economy than they do to slow the spread of the virus. But that's a practical issue, since the way it was handled in totalitarian countries like the PRC was much more effective, and therefore, IMO, more justifiable. I have no trouble with saying that public health during a pandemic should trump individual freedom. And I am pretty strongly libertarian on most issues.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 25, 2021, 12:35:22 PM
Quote from: greg on October 25, 2021, 10:24:02 AM
This is an interesting take. Earlier in the thread, it was referred to as a third World country (which I totally disagree with), but saying it is a rich third World country is a bit more of a nuanced, original interpretation. Either that, or a totally retarded one.  :D

I think I have been consistent on this front. The US is certainly a rich country, in fact the richest country in the World I believe unless China has gone past it.

Quote from: greg on October 25, 2021, 10:24:02 AMTo me it's a first world country with an unfortunate class gap. Maybe it isn't first world any more, idk, but the decades before the great recession I'd definitely say it's first world because anyone who isn't a total screwup could "make it." Nowadays, not so much.

Yes, things might have been different in the past, but I am talking about what the country is today. For all the richness the US takes astonishingly poor care of its people apart from the top 1 %, but that is the case for any third World country. The rich people in Banana Republics do phenomenally well even if regular people live in poverty.

Quote from: greg on October 25, 2021, 10:24:02 AMAnd just from my observations, there's two really significant things that explains why the US has higher poverty rates- 1) lack of social support- in our culture, it's common for parents to kick kids out of the house at the age of 18 and never help them. 2) drug addiction, large supply of drugs everywhere

Those are some of the reasons, but not all of them. Cost of education is one reason. Low minimum wages are another. Medical bills are one danger.

Quote from: greg on October 25, 2021, 10:24:02 AMThere's also a lot of really dumb people... I mean, if you were actually growing up around these people, you'd see why they could never make it, the problem is entirely themselves. They're just losers, I've been around kids in school that openly said they get in trouble with the police for fun and feel like they are destined for prison. In that case, you can't blame the US for not supporting them. Is that rare in Finland?

Stupid kids are everywhere in the World, but in some countries the society at least tries to help them to manage in life. In the US prisons are for the big part business so locking these kids up is profitable. In Finland locking people in prisons is seen as a burden to the society. The goal is to prison people for as short time as possible and instead try to help them to rehabilitate and become productive members of society. The problem of the US as a society is that it doesn't recognise the human dignity in everyone. Billionaires are worshipped while there is disdain for poor people and those who have made unfortunate choices in life. That is a bad foundation for having a first World country. 

Here is a link to a Youtube video about prisons in Finland: https://youtu.be/l554kV12Wuo (https://youtu.be/l554kV12Wuo)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on October 25, 2021, 04:02:27 PM
Quote from: Jo498 on October 25, 2021, 09:20:19 AM
Shutting down almost everything for months or a year because of a flu? Extending state of emergency? Forcing people to get a dubious vaccination (that would never have been admitted by the agencies 5 years ago) or lose their jobs. And so on, on the flimsiest of pretexts. All stuff we have not had in the West since the 1940s...
You certainly know what I am referring to. I guess you are fine with it and what one likes cannot be totalitarian...

I was hoping when I asked that you would say something unexpected from an angle I hadn't considered. But this stuff was debated and done with over a year ago.

Can I ask what you think of Trump's more laissez-faire handling of the pandemic?

Quote from: Jo498 on October 25, 2021, 09:41:10 AM

With the same arguments one could enforce a speed limit of 30 mph everywhere. Certainly fewer people would die. But it would also become silly to have powerful cars being able to do 75 mph.

I'll wager that back in the day when the speed limit actually was 30mph there were far more road deaths per percentage of drivers than at 75mph now, as cars had far less efficient steering, braking and in-built safety design.

And there were far fewer *rules*. Rules about requirements for getting a licence and rules about what you can and cant do on the road.

Was this vast proliferation of rules and regulations also Totalitarian, or do they mean you now have the *freedom* to travel at 75mph with much less likelihood of harming your fellow travelers and yourself?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on October 25, 2021, 04:55:45 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 25, 2021, 12:35:22 PM
I think I have been consistent on this front. The US is certainly a rich country, in fact the richest country in the World I believe unless China has gone past it.

Yes, things might have been different in the past, but I am talking about what the country is today. For all the richness the US takes astonishingly poor care of its people apart from the top 1 %, but that is the case for any third World country. The rich people in Banana Republics do phenomenally well even if regular people live in poverty.

Those are some of the reasons, but not all of them. Cost of education is one reason. Low minimum wages are another. Medical bills are one danger.

Stupid kids are everywhere in the World, but in some countries the society at least tries to help them to manage in life. In the US prisons are for the big part business so locking these kids up is profitable. In Finland locking people in prisons is seen as a burden to the society. The goal is to prison people for as short time as possible and instead try to help them to rehabilitate and become productive members of society. The problem of the US as a society is that it doesn't recognise the human dignity in everyone. Billionaires are worshipped while there is disdain for poor people and those who have made unfortunate choices in life. That is a bad foundation for having a first World country. 

Here is a link to a Youtube video about prisons in Finland: https://youtu.be/l554kV12Wuo (https://youtu.be/l554kV12Wuo)

Poju, have you ever been to a Third World country? Third World countries have widespread systemic poverty in which great masses of their population are immured.  Poverty in the US is not like that. There are poor people but not as great a percentage of the population, and for even the poorest of them it's not as desperate as it is in the Third World.  There are not great slums in the US in which everyone has mud floors, sporadic electricity, and no idea of where tomorrow's meals will come from. To put US poverty in the same category as Third World poverty is an insult to the suffering of the Third World's poor.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on October 25, 2021, 06:32:29 PM
Quote from: JBS on October 25, 2021, 04:55:45 PM
Poju, have you ever been to a Third World country? Third World countries have widespread systemic poverty in which great masses of their population are immured.  Poverty in the US is not like that. There are poor people but not as great a percentage of the population, and for even the poorest of them it's not as desperate as it is in the Third World.  There are not great slums in the US in which everyone has mud floors, sporadic electricity, and no idea of where tomorrow's meals will come from. To put US poverty in the same category as Third World poverty is an insult to the suffering of the Third World's poor.
I saved my money and went to India when I was 26. I had never been outside the U.S. I remember clearly the taxi ride from the airport to the hotel. I was in such shock. It took me three days to get over the shock. I almost turned around and went back that very day.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on October 25, 2021, 06:52:35 PM
Quote from: milk on October 25, 2021, 06:32:29 PM
I saved my money and went to India when I was 26. I had never been outside the U.S. I remember clearly the taxi ride from the airport to the hotel. I was in such shock. It took me three days to get over the shock. I almost turned around and went back that very day.

I can well believe it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 25, 2021, 09:17:33 PM
Quote from: JBS on October 25, 2021, 04:55:45 PM
Poju, have you ever been to a Third World country? Third World countries have widespread systemic poverty in which great masses of their population are immured.  Poverty in the US is not like that. There are poor people but not as great a percentage of the population, and for even the poorest of them it's not as desperate as it is in the Third World.  There are not great slums in the US in which everyone has mud floors, sporadic electricity, and no idea of where tomorrow's meals will come from. To put US poverty in the same category as Third World poverty is an insult to the suffering of the Third World's poor.

No, I haven't.

The US as a third World country is a special case and people tend to mistake it as a First World country for this reason, even I did up until recently after having seen how "hopeless" country we are talking about. The US is TOTALLY different third World country than say Ethiopia. The latter is a very poor country while the US is the richest country in the World, but intellectually bankrupt as a society. What happened on January 6th doesn't happen in first World countries. In Alabama many don't have proper sewage systems and due to that have worms (luckily there is ivermectin for that  ;D ). People don't have worms in first World countries. In first World countries the quality of tap water is strictly regulated. This is not the case in many places in the US, but to be fair, Mexico has even worse tap water quality as far as I know. Last winter Texas suffered massive power shortages, because of the lack of regulation. That's not maybe as bad as electrity in Ethiopia, but is certainly isn't first World level either. The US is a third World country because it operates under corporate rule. There is two kinds of poverty: Absolute poverty and relative poverty. The US has a huge relative poverty problem.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 25, 2021, 09:25:26 PM
Quote from: milk on October 25, 2021, 06:32:29 PM
I saved my money and went to India when I was 26. I had never been outside the U.S. I remember clearly the taxi ride from the airport to the hotel. I was in such shock. It took me three days to get over the shock. I almost turned around and went back that very day.

I was traumatized by a taxi ride in Naples.  ??? Italians have an interesting attitude when it comes to traffic rules.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on October 25, 2021, 09:47:40 PM
Quote from: milk on October 25, 2021, 06:32:29 PM
I saved my money and went to India when I was 26. I had never been outside the U.S. I remember clearly the taxi ride from the airport to the hotel. I was in such shock. It took me three days to get over the shock. I almost turned around and went back that very day.
Anyone interested needs to check out bald and bankrupt's channel, many great India videos like what the slums look like in India (in this one):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLJy5njInoc

Though mostly he is known for his awesome eastern Europe/ex-Soviet tourism, videos which are quite unlike anything I've seen before.



Quote from: 71 dB on October 25, 2021, 09:25:26 PM
I was traumatized by a taxi ride in Naples.  ??? Italians have an interesting attitude when it comes to traffic rules.
Lol I used to work with someone that said exactly the same thing, never will he take a taxi in Italy again.




Quote from: 71 dB on October 25, 2021, 12:35:22 PM
Those are some of the reasons, but not all of them. Cost of education is one reason. Low minimum wages are another. Medical bills are one danger.
True.


Quote from: 71 dB on October 25, 2021, 12:35:22 PM
Stupid kids are everywhere in the World, but in some countries the society at least tries to help them to manage in life.
It should be the parents that help the most, but we also have a problem with many kids growing up without a dad. So not exactly a great start emotionally, mentally, or financially for them. When that fails, society can help- you need some sort of safety net for everyone. But that's also a financial burden on society as a whole...



Quote from: 71 dB on October 25, 2021, 12:35:22 PM
The goal is to prison people for as short time as possible and instead try to help them to rehabilitate and become productive members of society.
This may work for many, and is a good overall approach... but it would have some limitations. There's people out there who are hopeless... with psychopathy they have an irregular brain that will never change, if they can get away with something, they'll always try because they completely lack fear and at the same time are too enticed by rewards. IMO a good system would be able to distinguish the screwups that end up in prison because they just need some guidance vs. the evil people, and treat them differently.


Quote from: 71 dB on October 25, 2021, 12:35:22 PM
Here is a link to a Youtube video about prisons in Finland: https://youtu.be/l554kV12Wuo (https://youtu.be/l554kV12Wuo)
That was interesting, didn't seem so bad at all.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on October 26, 2021, 01:35:41 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 25, 2021, 06:56:35 AM
I have been to the US (Florida) only once in 1982 when I was 11 years old. At that time the country seemed a wonderland: Disneyworld, Space Center, Sea World, warm sunny weather, 16 TV channels (Finland had 3 TV channels at that time I think), Pacman everywhere and of course as much Reese's Peanut Butter Cups one can eat!  $:)

Ironic your only IRL encounter with the USA should be Florida.
Why is sixteen channels better than three?

Quote

People are stupid and ignorant. We want these dictator wanna-bees in powers. We will loose our freedom and then we must fight for it again. That makes people wiser for 100-300 years and then this cycle will repeat itself. We are that stupid. Better enjoy our freedom while we can. If I am lucky I will be dead before Finland becomes a dictatorship. Finland has very strong democracy. Undoing it will takes decades, I hope...  ???

It's all very well to fantasize about Game of Throne-like narratives of doom and redemption, but there is not time for even a hundred-year cycle. Look at the Amazon forests (I mean the river, not the retail biz). Give the Americas to venal would be dictators for 25 years and the planet is doomed. Or rather, the human race is. Ten years would probably be a closer number.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on October 26, 2021, 01:58:55 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on October 25, 2021, 09:41:10 AM
The danger and deadliness of Covid is roughly in the same order of magnitude as the flu (the flu is quite dangerous to the same frail or old people Cov is dangerous for). Twice as dangerous is still the same order of magnitude. But even 10 times as dangerous would hardly have justified the measures we had in many countries.


The "it's just a flu" thing is a semantic game. We're used to the word flu.
However, there are different kinds of flu, and especially the newness of Covid  -  meaning no natural immunity  -  was and still is a danger.
There have been over five million dead now, worldwide, and we're still counting. Maybe you think that's not a big deal. One of the reasons why it's not more is exactly the 'totalitarian' measures, such as requiring people to mask up and giving a damn good vaccine.
The vaccine has been consistently labeled "experimental" by superstitious antivaccine people, who do not realise medical science (and indeed all science) has always been experimental. It's another word for progress.
The mRNA vaccine had been in development, in your very backyard, for about 25 years when Covid happened. People talk as if it had been made in a couple of months. That's just not true.
Last time I checked about three billion people had been double vaccinated (various types of vaccine) and if there had been serious side effects to these vaccines we surely would have had millions of vaccine deaths. There have been very few, and I cannot help but notice antivax people have constructed vaccine death registration websites where people can just register their neighbour as a vaccine death even while this same neighbour is out there washing his car.
Similarly it's not true only frail old people die of Covid. That's another piece of antivax propaganda (and I'm not sure what to think of people saying: oh it's just old and vulnerable people dying...) Thirty-year olds die, too.
Do I think some governments have gone overboard in their communication about safety measures. Yes I do.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on October 26, 2021, 03:17:11 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on October 25, 2021, 09:41:10 AM
The danger and deadliness of Covid is roughly in the same order of magnitude as the flu (the flu is quite dangerous to the same frail or old people Cov is dangerous for). Twice as dangerous is still the same order of magnitude. But even 10 times as dangerous would hardly have justified the measures we had in many countries.
With the same arguments one could enforce a speed limit of 30 mph everywhere. Certainly fewer people would die. But it would also become silly to have powerful cars being able to do 75 mph.

I'm going to join the chorus here as say that you assessment is just wrong.  Covid-19 might not be 10x more lethal than seasonal flu but it is 3-5x more lethal.  Also experience shows that Covid patients are far more likely to end up in ICUs;  over-capacity ICU has been a problem in many localities where flu has not.  Then too there is the issue with "long Covid" that doesn't exist with seasonal flu.  Yet another factor is that Covid can be spread over a couple of weeks by people who are asymptomatic.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2766121 (https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2766121)

As for car deaths, well, vehicle crashes aren't contagious.  USA motor vehicle deaths have run about 38k where as Covid deaths have run over 600k in a year and a half, so there is no comparison -- which isn't to say that lower maximum speeds wouldn't be safer and help the environment.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on October 26, 2021, 03:22:23 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on October 26, 2021, 03:17:11 AM
I'm going to join the chorus here as say that you assessment is just wrong.  Covid-19 might not be 10x more lethal than seasonal flu but it is 3-5x more lethal.  Also experience shows that Covid patients are far more likely to end up in ICUs;  over-capacity ICU has been a problem in many localities where flu has not.  Then too there is the issue with "long Covid" that doesn't exist with seasonal flu.  Yet another factor is that Covid can be spread over a couple of weeks by people who are asymptomatic.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2766121 (https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2766121)

As for car deaths, well, vehicle crashes aren't contagious.  USA motor vehicle deaths have run about 38k where as Covid deaths have run over 600k in a year and a half, so there is no comparison -- which isn't to say that lower maximum speeds wouldn't be safer and help the environment.

Actually, I believe it is fair to say it is 30 times more lethal, 10 times higher fatality rate, 3 times higher rate of spread. In the U.S. the seasonal flu kills 60,000 people in a bad year. Covid-19 has killed about 850,000, and that is with strong social distancing, shutdowns, remote work, and more than half the country having received a highly effective vaccine.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 26, 2021, 04:20:12 AM
Quote from: Herman on October 26, 2021, 01:35:41 AM
Ironic your only IRL encounter with the USA should be Florida.
Why is sixteen channels better than three?

Why is Florida ironic? My uncle worked for Nokia and had a secondment in Florida for a few years. He and his family invited my family to stay with them in Florida. I didn't have to deal with crazy anti-maskers and anti-vaxxers because that lunacy became a thing almost 4 decades later. Even the Republicans were much more rational back then. The country was only 6 years into legalized bribery (Buckley v. Valeo in 1976). It wasn't that bad back then and an 11-years old boy from Europe certainly didn't see whatever bad there was. I was busy/happy eating Reese's Peanut Butter Cups.  :P

Obviously 11 year old me thought more channels is better, 16 channels is 5.33.. times better than 3. Now that I have dozens of channels myself in Finland have I learned that more is less: What they show on those channels is complete junk most of the time.

Quote from: Herman on October 26, 2021, 01:35:41 AM
It's all very well to fantasize about Game of Throne-like narratives of doom and redemption, but there is not time for even a hundred-year cycle. Look at the Amazon forests (I mean the river, not the retail biz). Give the Americas to venal would be dictators for 25 years and the planet is doomed. Or rather, the human race is. Ten years would probably be a closer number.

Yeah. President Sinema and VP Manchin are making sure the planet and humanity won't have it easy. All we can hope is the progressives are willing to shoot the hostage (the bipartisan bill), but it looks very bad...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on October 26, 2021, 07:08:49 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 25, 2021, 09:17:33 PM
No, I haven't.

The US as a third World country is a special case and people tend to mistake it as a First World country for this reason, even I did up until recently after having seen how "hopeless" country we are talking about. The US is TOTALLY different third World country than say Ethiopia. The latter is a very poor country while the US is the richest country in the World, but intellectually bankrupt as a society. What happened on January 6th doesn't happen in first World countries. In Alabama many don't have proper sewage systems and due to that have worms (luckily there is ivermectin for that  ;D ). People don't have worms in first World countries. In first World countries the quality of tap water is strictly regulated. This is not the case in many places in the US, but to be fair, Mexico has even worse tap water quality as far as I know. Last winter Texas suffered massive power shortages, because of the lack of regulation. That's not maybe as bad as electrity in Ethiopia, but is certainly isn't first World level either. The US is a third World country because it operates under corporate rule. There is two kinds of poverty: Absolute poverty and relative poverty. The US has a huge relative poverty problem.

Having the agitprop in boldface is helpful.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on October 26, 2021, 07:52:20 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 26, 2021, 04:20:12 AM
Why is Florida ironic?

For being the utter bottom of the barrel.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on October 26, 2021, 08:43:26 AM
Opinion: Here's a little-noticed reason the Virginia race is such a big deal

Greg Sargent

Columnist Yesterday at 4:49 p.m. EDT

It's widely known that the Virginia gubernatorial race will offer clues on what the 2022 midterm elections might look like. If Democrats win, they might campaign aggressively on vaccine and mask requirements. If Republicans win, they'll see that demagoguing on critical race theory and feeding former president Donald Trump's lies about 2020 energize the base with no serious cost among swing voters.

But there's a less obvious way the Virginia outcome could help shape future campaigns. A Democratic victory might show that another issue has unexpected political potential: Paid leave.

To an underappreciated degree, Democrat Terry McAuliffe's candidacy has put paid leave in the foreground. McAuliffe, who served as governor from 2014 to 2018, has pledged to institute statewide paid sick, family and medical leave if elected, vowing to make Virginia the "first Southern state" to do so.

Numerous ads from the McAuliffe campaign have placed paid leave front and center. One ad casts passing a new paid-leave measure as pivotal to ensuring that "everyone is treated with dignity and respect."

Another ad says this is central to making sure that "quality, affordable health care" is a "basic human right." These ads place paid leave on a par with other longtime Democratic priorities that have been go-to issues in campaigns — such as curbing prescription drug prices and expanding access to baseline health care.

Jared Leopold, a Democratic strategist in Virginia who also consults for a paid-leave advocacy group, points out that Democrats have not previously highlighted the issue to this degree during gubernatorial campaigns.

"Paid leave was not a central part of the campaign message in the Virginia gubernatorial elections in 2017 or 2013," Leopold told me, adding that McAuliffe is "blazing a new path" on the issue.

"If McAuliffe succeeds, you'll see other Democratic candidates for governor run on a paid leave agenda in the midterms in 2022," Leopold said.

This matters for many reasons. First, as Democrats in Washington negotiate the Build Back Better reconciliation bill, it looks as though the plan's paid sick, family and medical leave provisions may be downsized dramatically — from 12 weeks to four weeks — to meet centrists' demands for lower spending.

This means that future action on the state and federal level will be even more necessary. After all, as Jordan Weissmann points out, if the proposal shrinks, it will be badly insufficient: We'll still be an outlier relative to other wealthy developed nations, and it would not meet the needs of Americans, judging by the unpaid leave they tend to take.

Underscoring the point, right now only nine states have some form of paid family or medical leave, according to Kathleen Romig of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. If the proposal is chopped down, and Republicans take one or both chambers of Congress in the 2022 midterms, states might be the only near-term option for improving the situation.

"If they cut it down, then there will be more need in the states to fill in the gaps," Romig told me.

With major 2022 gubernatorial contests looming in swing states such as Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan, a McAuliffe victory might embolden Democrats to press the issue forward in those states as well. It might also give Democrats a good issue in the congressional elections, and (if they manage to hold Congress) more impetus to expand the program on the federal level in coming years.

Beyond all this, if paid leave is seen as a potent issue, it may demonstrate that the deep injustices in our economy exposed by the covid-19 pandemic have created new political possibilities. Another McAuliffe ad speaks to exactly this point: It casts paid leave as essential to whether Virginia can "build a post-covid economy," an idea that obviously could not be given voice in previous elections.

And so, even if the compromises needed to pass the Build Back Better package leave us as an outlier relative to other developed nations on this issue, a McAuliffe victory might underscore that the political will is taking shape to change this. Needless to say, a Democratic loss will likely make progress even harder.

All of which is yet another reminder: Virginia Democrats need to take this race seriously.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on October 26, 2021, 01:43:24 PM
A contrarian take on the disinformation panic (https://www.vox.com/vox-conversations-podcast/22732652/vox-conversations-joe-bernstein-disinformation-misinformation-big-tech)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 26, 2021, 02:14:46 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 26, 2021, 07:08:49 AM
Having the agitprop in boldface is helpful.

The boldface part is stating the fact. I made it boldface to highlight it is the sentence that contains the essense of my post.

Quote from: Herman on October 26, 2021, 07:52:20 AM
For being the utter bottom of the barrel.

Bottom of the barrel or not, I had awesome time in Florida back in 1982.  8)
Whatever problems they had over there in 1982, I was well insulated and ignorant of it all.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on October 26, 2021, 02:17:08 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 26, 2021, 02:14:46 PM
The boldface part is stating the fact.

You still do not understand the difference between fact and assertion. Doesn't reflect well on your education.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on October 26, 2021, 02:24:58 PM
Opinion: Pity the billionaire, so sensitive and oppressed

By Paul Waldman
Columnist
Today at 1:10 p.m. EDT

In a search for revenue to fund their social infrastructure bill, Democrats are considering a special tax on billionaires. And Republicans, for whom no principle is more sacred than the idea that the wealthy should pay as little in taxes as possible, are aghast.

This particular tax may not be the best of all approaches; it may be included mainly because Democrats could get centrist senators to agree to it. But the reaction from Republicans requires us to remind ourselves of how much of our debate on taxes revolves around absurd myths that have been disproved again and again.

It's as though every time an automobile manufacturer debuts a new model we have to spend weeks debating whether the human body will burst into flames if accelerated past 50 miles per hour.

The new proposal would apply only to billionaires or those who earn more than $100 million in income three years in a row, a tiny sliver of the wealthiest Americans. It would require them to pay taxes on the increased value of assets such as stocks, regardless of whether they sold the asset that year. As the system works now, people pay taxes on those assets only when they sell them.

Because this proposal is on the table, we are now required to ruminate on the delicate psychology of the afflicted billionaire, who in Republicans' telling is always moments away from liquidating his assets and decamping to a mountaintop ashram in despair. We must tiptoe around his sensitive emotions with the utmost care, lest he deprive us of his miraculous job-creating powers.

For instance, here's Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) on Fox News:

It's not a good idea to tell billionaires, "Don't come to America. Don't start your business here." To tell the Steve Jobs and the Bill Gates and people like that, "This isn't the place to begin your business. Go somewhere else." That's a bad idea. But number two, you're going to tax people not when they sell something, but just when they own it and the value goes up. And what that means is that people who are multibillionaires are going to look and say, "I don't want to invest in the stock market, because as that goes up I'm going to get taxed. So maybe I will instead invest in a ranch, or in paintings, or things that don't build jobs and create a stronger economy."

Though Romney knows many more billionaires than you or I do, his description of their thinking strains logic, to say the least. Jobs and Gates weren't billionaires who decided to come to America to found Apple and Microsoft because of our low taxes on the rich. They were Americans who became billionaires from the companies they founded here in America.

And the idea that billionaires would suddenly decide to forget about the stock market and turn exclusively to acquiring ranches and paintings because their stock gains will be taxed is ludicrous. We're supposed to believe that Elon Musk, whose net worth now approaches $300 billion from his stock in Tesla, will tell his board of directors, "If I have to pay more in taxes, then I'm done with stocks. From now on, I want you to pay me in ranches."

We hear these arguments from Republicans every time a tax increase on the wealthy is proposed: There will be a billionaires' strike, and the entire economy will collapse. We heard it when Bill Clinton signed a tax hike on them, and when Barack Obama did. Yet there was no mass exodus of the wealthy either time. Why, for instance, has Romney himself not taken his millions and moved to Paraguay, where taxes are quite low? Because he likes it here, and paying a bit more doesn't affect his lifestyle one iota.

It's like a 5-year-old threatening to hold his breath until he dies. It's just not a threat you need to take seriously.

The idea underlying these preposterous assertions is that the wealthy are spectacularly sensitive to even the smallest changes in their tax bills, and will radically alter everything about their lives — the country where they make their home, the way their businesses are constructed — to avoid paying even a penny more.

But there is precisely zero evidence to suggest that's true. Like almost everything Republicans say about taxes, it's essentially a religious belief, one that's immune to refutation by the facts.

What do the superwealthy actually do when faced with a tax increase? They use armies of accountants and tax lawyers to pay as little of that increase as possible (according to the White House, billionaires pay an average of just 8.2 percent in federal income taxes). They don't leave the country or shut down their businesses.

And of course, there's a flip side to the Republican argument about the sensitivity of billionaires to tax changes: If we cut their taxes, the billionaire class will erupt like a volcano of prosperity, showering so much new wealth upon us that it will usher in an age of human flourishing unknown in the annals of history.

That doesn't happen, either. It didn't happen when Donald Trump signed a big tax cut, or when George W. Bush did. Yet the next time Republicans control Washington, they'll say it again as they pass yet another cut for the wealthy.

Experience has told us that the Republican arguments about how the superwealthy react to tax changes are just a fantasy. So how about we ask better questions about proposals such as this one: How much revenue would this raise? Will it be difficult to administer? How can it be designed to make cheating harder? Would it make our system more fair? How does it compare with alternatives?

If we consider those questions, we may decide there are better ways to accomplish our goals than this billionaires' tax. But it shouldn't be because we're worried that billionaires, whiny though they might be, will actually do what they always threaten.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 26, 2021, 03:20:46 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 26, 2021, 02:17:08 PM
You still do not understand the difference between fact and assertion. Doesn't reflect well on your education.

Are you suggesting that it is only possible to make assertions about under what kind of rule a country is?

North Korea being ruled under dictatorship is only an assertion, not a fact?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on October 26, 2021, 03:53:16 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 26, 2021, 02:24:58 PM
Opinion: Pity the billionaire, so sensitive and oppressed

By Paul Waldman
Columnist
Today at 1:10 p.m. EDT

In a search for revenue to fund their social infrastructure bill, Democrats are considering a special tax on billionaires. And Republicans, for whom no principle is more sacred than the idea that the wealthy should pay as little in taxes as possible, are aghast.

This particular tax may not be the best of all approaches; it may be included mainly because Democrats could get centrist senators to agree to it. But the reaction from Republicans requires us to remind ourselves of how much of our debate on taxes revolves around absurd myths that have been disproved again and again.

It's as though every time an automobile manufacturer debuts a new model we have to spend weeks debating whether the human body will burst into flames if accelerated past 50 miles per hour.

The new proposal would apply only to billionaires or those who earn more than $100 million in income three years in a row, a tiny sliver of the wealthiest Americans. It would require them to pay taxes on the increased value of assets such as stocks, regardless of whether they sold the asset that year. As the system works now, people pay taxes on those assets only when they sell them.

Because this proposal is on the table, we are now required to ruminate on the delicate psychology of the afflicted billionaire, who in Republicans' telling is always moments away from liquidating his assets and decamping to a mountaintop ashram in despair. We must tiptoe around his sensitive emotions with the utmost care, lest he deprive us of his miraculous job-creating powers.

For instance, here's Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) on Fox News:

It's not a good idea to tell billionaires, "Don't come to America. Don't start your business here." To tell the Steve Jobs and the Bill Gates and people like that, "This isn't the place to begin your business. Go somewhere else." That's a bad idea. But number two, you're going to tax people not when they sell something, but just when they own it and the value goes up. And what that means is that people who are multibillionaires are going to look and say, "I don't want to invest in the stock market, because as that goes up I'm going to get taxed. So maybe I will instead invest in a ranch, or in paintings, or things that don't build jobs and create a stronger economy."

Though Romney knows many more billionaires than you or I do, his description of their thinking strains logic, to say the least. Jobs and Gates weren't billionaires who decided to come to America to found Apple and Microsoft because of our low taxes on the rich. They were Americans who became billionaires from the companies they founded here in America.

And the idea that billionaires would suddenly decide to forget about the stock market and turn exclusively to acquiring ranches and paintings because their stock gains will be taxed is ludicrous. We're supposed to believe that Elon Musk, whose net worth now approaches $300 billion from his stock in Tesla, will tell his board of directors, "If I have to pay more in taxes, then I'm done with stocks. From now on, I want you to pay me in ranches."

We hear these arguments from Republicans every time a tax increase on the wealthy is proposed: There will be a billionaires' strike, and the entire economy will collapse. We heard it when Bill Clinton signed a tax hike on them, and when Barack Obama did. Yet there was no mass exodus of the wealthy either time. Why, for instance, has Romney himself not taken his millions and moved to Paraguay, where taxes are quite low? Because he likes it here, and paying a bit more doesn't affect his lifestyle one iota.

It's like a 5-year-old threatening to hold his breath until he dies. It's just not a threat you need to take seriously.

The idea underlying these preposterous assertions is that the wealthy are spectacularly sensitive to even the smallest changes in their tax bills, and will radically alter everything about their lives — the country where they make their home, the way their businesses are constructed — to avoid paying even a penny more.

But there is precisely zero evidence to suggest that's true. Like almost everything Republicans say about taxes, it's essentially a religious belief, one that's immune to refutation by the facts.

What do the superwealthy actually do when faced with a tax increase? They use armies of accountants and tax lawyers to pay as little of that increase as possible (according to the White House, billionaires pay an average of just 8.2 percent in federal income taxes). They don't leave the country or shut down their businesses.

And of course, there's a flip side to the Republican argument about the sensitivity of billionaires to tax changes: If we cut their taxes, the billionaire class will erupt like a volcano of prosperity, showering so much new wealth upon us that it will usher in an age of human flourishing unknown in the annals of history.

That doesn't happen, either. It didn't happen when Donald Trump signed a big tax cut, or when George W. Bush did. Yet the next time Republicans control Washington, they'll say it again as they pass yet another cut for the wealthy.

Experience has told us that the Republican arguments about how the superwealthy react to tax changes are just a fantasy. So how about we ask better questions about proposals such as this one: How much revenue would this raise? Will it be difficult to administer? How can it be designed to make cheating harder? Would it make our system more fair? How does it compare with alternatives?

If we consider those questions, we may decide there are better ways to accomplish our goals than this billionaires' tax. But it shouldn't be because we're worried that billionaires, whiny though they might be, will actually do what they always threaten.

Supply-side, "Bribe the Rich" policies haven't worked for the last 40 years, they aren't going to work now.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on October 26, 2021, 09:18:17 PM
Quote from: Herman on October 26, 2021, 07:52:20 AM
For being the utter bottom of the barrel.
Lol taking the Florida man stereotypes seriously?
Seems if it were so bad, so many people wouldn't be going there every winter and/or retiring. There's far more states that could be a better contender for bottom of the barrel. It's just a chill, old people retirement state.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 27, 2021, 02:36:39 AM
Quote from: greg on October 26, 2021, 09:18:17 PM
Lol taking the Florida man stereotypes seriously?
Seems if it were so bad, so many people wouldn't be going there every winter and/or retiring. There's far more states that could be a better contender for bottom of the barrel. It's just a chill, old people retirement state.

Alabama is probably the worst State of all. Florida's problem is the proximity of Cuba, which means a lot of Cubans live there and vote for Republicans because they fear Dems are communists, ignorant as they are (fact, not racism. Whites are also ignorant. When it come to Cuba, I defend that place more than most, for example bringing up often their effective healthcare system and lunch cancer drugs. Cuba has the highest Covid vaccination rate in all of America and one of the highest in the World so Cuba does heathcare miraculously well for a poor communist country.). So Floridans have morons like Ronald Dion DeSantis running their State.  :P
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: ritter on October 27, 2021, 02:56:57 AM
For heaven's sake!

Are you not embarrassed to pontifícate from your high Finnish tower, and call everyone left, right and centre ignorant? Your trip to Florida when you were eleven does not make you an expert on the place, and you clearly don't have the foggiest idea what life conditions in Cuba are.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on October 27, 2021, 03:04:52 AM
Quote from: ritter on October 27, 2021, 02:56:57 AM
For heaven's sake!

Are you not embarrassed to pontifícate from your high Finnish tower, and call everyone left, right and centre ignorant? Your trip to Florida when you were eleven does not make you an expert on the place, and you clearly don't have the foggiest idea what life conditions in Cuba are.

What kind of expertise have I claimed? I have said nothing about the living conditions in Cuba. I said they have effective healthcare system (Google it if you don't believe) and Cuba is known for their lunch cancer treatment (Google if needed). Their Covid vaccination rate is very high (Google if you need). I have not claimed to have expertise because I visited Florida in 1982. I have said I was young and ignorant of politics at that age. If I understand and know anything about the US politics is BECAUSE I have followed it intensively for the last 5 years. I had great time in Florida in 1982. I did. That's not claiming any expertise of the place. If anything it is claiming expertise of my own experiencies and that's something I think I can claim, can't I?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on October 27, 2021, 06:30:14 AM
For any Michael Moore devotees we may have here:

Healthy in Cuba, Sick in America?
Moore defends his film "Sicko" and the virtues of socialized medicine. (https://abcnews.go.com/Exclusiva/story?id=3568278&page=1)

[...]""This isn't just me saying this, you know. All the world health organizations or whatever have confirmed that if there's one thing they do right in Cuba, it's health care," Moore said. "And there's very little debate about that."

In fact, there is plenty of debate. Miami-based Cuban Human Rights activist Jose Carro says Moore's movie paints an inaccurate picture.

"These films that try to portray the health care system as superior to that of the U.S. are lacking in truth," Carro said. He asserts that most hospitals for Cuban citizens are dilapidated, that conditions are filthy and that patients are so neglected that some are starving.

George Utset, who runs the anti-Castro Web site called therealcuba.com, says Moore's group didn't "go to the hospital for regular Cubans. They go to the hospital for the elite and it's [a] very different condition."

Darsi Ferrer, a human rights advocate in Cuba, issued an SOS via telephone, wanting the world to know that ordinary Cubans are "crazy with desperation" over the horrendous state of their health care.

Moore says that because Cubans get such good health care, they live longer and it is true that a U.N. report claims that they live nearly two months longer. But the United Nations didn't gather any data, said Carro.

"The United Nations simply reports whatever the government in Cuba reports, so that we have no objective way to know what the real statistics are," he said.

Although Cuba claims to have low infant mortality rates, doctors have said the data is misleading because when there might be indications of problems with the fetus, there is a widespread practice of forced abortions.

Julio Alfonso said, "We personally used to do 70 to 80 abortions a day." Yanet Sanchez, a Cuban exile, said she was simply told to submit to an abortion. "They told me I should end the pregnancy," said Sanchez. "It was my very first pregnancy. I wanted to have the child."

Other doctors have said that if a child dies a few hours after birth, they don't count it as ever having lived, which ultimately makes infant mortality in Cuba look better than that of the United States.

"It changes the number, even though the same number of children may be dying or more," said Carro.

Moore disagrees. "All the independent health organizations in the world, and even our own CIA, believes that the Cubans have a pretty good health system. And they do, in fact, live longer than we do," he said.

But when "20/20" contacted the CIA, officials said, "We don't say that Cuba has a pretty good system or that Cubans live longer than Americans."

In fact, the CIA's World Fact Book says Americans live nearly a year longer. Although a U.N. report supports Moore's position, that data comes straight from the Cuban government.

Why believe anything the Cuban government says about Cuba? Moore said, "Let's stick to Canada and Britain and this stuff because I think these are legitimate arguments that are made against the film and against the, the so-called idea of socialized medicine. And I think you should challenge me on these things, and I'll give you my answer."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on October 27, 2021, 07:26:32 AM
Quote from: ritter on October 27, 2021, 02:56:57 AM
For heaven's sake!

Are you not embarrassed to pontifícate from your high Finnish tower, and call everyone left, right and centre ignorant? Your trip to Florida when you were eleven does not make you an expert on the place, and you clearly don't have the foggiest idea what life conditions in Cuba are.


Gosh, it didn't take long for "if you disagree with me, you're ignorant or you're an idiot" to come back. No, I don't expect he has learnt to be embarrassed at all, by doing so.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on October 27, 2021, 07:36:22 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 27, 2021, 02:36:39 AM
Alabama is probably the worst State of all. Florida's problem is the proximity of Cuba, which means a lot of Cubans live there and vote for Republicans because they fear Dems are communists, ignorant as they are (fact, not racism. Whites are also ignorant. When it come to Cuba, I defend that place more than most, for example bringing up often their effective healthcare system and lunch cancer drugs. Cuba has the highest Covid vaccination rate in all of America and one of the highest in the World so Cuba does heathcare miraculously well for a poor communist country.). So Floridans have morons like Ronald Dion DeSantis running their State.  :P

Your condescension towards Cubans is disturbing. They are "Florida's problem" because they are "ignorant" and vote Republican. Maybe you can accept that they are people who's political inclinations are colored by their past experience, under a brutal "socialist" dictatorship they they had to take desperate measures to escape. That Democrats have failed to attract Cubans is a failure of the Democratic Party.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on October 27, 2021, 08:23:49 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 27, 2021, 02:36:39 AM
...ignorant as they are (fact, not racism.

Rhetorical q.: Why is it worth pointing out again that you have no grasp of the distinction between assertion and fact? Because it is an indicator that you are incapable of reliably processing your YouTube intake.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on October 27, 2021, 08:26:13 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on October 27, 2021, 06:30:14 AM
For any Michael Moore devotees we may have here:

Healthy in Cuba, Sick in America?
Moore defends his film "Sicko" and the virtues of socialized medicine. (https://abcnews.go.com/Exclusiva/story?id=3568278&page=1)
...

Why believe anything the Cuban government says about Cuba? Moore said, "Let's stick to Canada and Britain and this stuff because I think these are legitimate arguments that are made against the film and against the, the so-called idea of socialized medicine. And I think you should challenge me on these things, and I'll give you my answer."

Indeed, it you're going to criticize Moore's film, find the find the errors or hyperbole regarding Canada or Britain.  There there is no serious question of Canadian or British authorities deliberately lying to Moore or anyone.

OTOH, from my communications with American conservatives, I glean that they are subject to a great deal of disingenuous nonsense  the Canadian system in particular coming from the usual sort of unreliable sources.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on October 27, 2021, 09:47:09 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on October 27, 2021, 02:36:39 AM
Alabama is probably the worst State of all.
That's exactly the main state I was thinking of. A few other southern states as well. But also some of the northeastern states and California could be miserable places to live in if you are poor/working at a minimum wage job. Seems like you'd have to work 60+ hours a week just to survive in a shared apartment.  :-X

(disclaimer: never been to Alabama lol)

I'm finding Texas to be pretty good, home prices are low enough to where I should be able to move into a house next year- many other states in the US, it would be not affordable at all (despite having an income higher than average and no kids or debt). (and have been living in a two-bedroom apartment for over 2 years alone- rent is affordable here!). That seems to be why people are moving here a lot, too.


Quote from: 71 dB on October 27, 2021, 02:36:39 AM
Florida's problem is the proximity of Cuba, which means a lot of Cubans live there and vote for Republicans because they fear Dems are communists
Seems to be natural human behavior, wanting to get as far away as possible from what caused them psychological distress. A similar thing with that one lady who escaped from North Korea and got big on youtube recently- she kinda goes hardcore on the freedom message.
This type of irrational fear plays into the psychology of the woke crowd as well- won't go further into that, but sure you know what I mean.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on October 27, 2021, 10:12:29 AM
A good point at which to interject this:

Political Speech for Human Dingleberries Has Never Been More Robust (https://www.thebulwark.com/political-speech-for-human-dingleberries-has-never-been-more-robust/)

Never in the history of the world have more human dingleberries had larger platforms to spew deranged nonsense about politics than they do right now, at this moment. We are in a golden age for fools with political views outside the mainstream.

If you bookmark this page and come back to it in a week, or a month, or a year, the dingleberry maxim will be as true then as it is today. There seems to be a Moore's Law for the dispersion of idiotic content and no matter what the cEnSorS do to slow it down, the takes transistors still find a way to double capacity every year.

The breadth and depth of this speech is so vast that someone who hasn't engrossed themselves in internet political culture might have no idea of its reach. If you are over the age of 35, there are people on YouTube and Twitch and TikTok that you have never heard of who have significantly larger audiences for their radical political ravings than the most preeminent policy journals had during your formative years.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on October 27, 2021, 10:36:35 AM
Meghan McCain Cuts Ties With Lindsey Graham: He's 'Not' a 'Member of My Family'

Justin Baragona

Media Reporter
Updated Oct. 27, 2021 12:49PM ET Published Oct. 27, 2021 12:25PM ET

Meghan McCain dramatically kicked Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) to the curb on Wednesday, publicly declaring that the man she once affectionately referred to as an "uncle" is not a "member of my family" and "hasn't been for a very long time."

For years now, Graham has tried to reconcile his close relationship with the late Sen. John McCain and his undying loyalty to disgraced former President Donald Trump, who notoriously attacked McCain and derided the Vietnam POW's war record—even in death.

While Meghan McCain previously said that she refuses to "talk crap" about Graham, despite his "questionable" actions, this week appeared to be the final straw for the former View host.

In her new audiobook memoir, titled Bad Republican, McCain revisited her feud with Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner, calling them "funeral crashers" for showing up at her father's 2018 ceremony. "As far as I knew, they had not been invited but they showed up anyway," she wrote of the ex-president's daughter and son-in-law, colloquially known as "Javanka."

Graham, however, told the Washington Post that McCain was mistaken and that the couple's "presence was approved." Adding that "nobody showed up uninvited," the South Carolina lawmaker said he understood "how stressful all this has been" for McCain and "those who attack her dad will never be forgiven by her."

It had also previously been reported that Graham "had cleared" the couple's funeral invitation with the late senator's widow, Cindy McCain. A source close to Javanka also told the Post that Cindy invited them via Graham. Funeral organizers were also aware that the couple, both senior White House aides at the time, would attend, according to an email reviewed by the Post.

But in response to the Post's report, a spokesperson for Meghan McCain said the conservative pundit "stands by the accuracy of her memoir" and that she "was unaware of any invitation to a member of the Trump family to her father's funeral."

And with Graham publicly siding with the Trump family, McCain then took to Twitter on Wednesday morning to cut ties with the longtime family friend.

"Lindsey Graham may consider himself a member of my family, but he is not and hasn't been for a very long time," she tweeted.

"He certainly doesn't speak for me or my life experiences. Full stop," McCain concluded. "The media should stop treating him like he is an expert on anything McCain related."

Graham did not immediately react to getting the public boot from the McCain family, but Javanka has already responded to the ex-View host's shots at them.

"Jared and Ivanka had about as much interest in attending the funeral as they did the half dozen or so dinner invitations that Ben and Meghan pestered them with after the funeral," a source close to the couple told The Post, referencing McCain and her husband Ben Domenech.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on October 27, 2021, 10:43:13 AM
Quote from: greg on October 26, 2021, 09:18:17 PM
It's just a chill, old people retirement state.

Yeah, just chill, deeply corrupt turn-the-elections around state, where the governor is actively telling people to drop dead rather than take covid precautions.

Oh, and those chill old folks retirement homes collapse, and nobody cares.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on October 27, 2021, 01:57:28 PM
Quote from: Herman on October 27, 2021, 10:43:13 AM
Yeah, just chill, deeply corrupt turn-the-elections around state, where the governor is actively telling people to drop dead rather than take covid precautions.

Oh, and those chill old folks retirement homes collapse, and nobody cares.
You could also judge a state in other ways besides whether it agrees with your political leanings or not.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on October 27, 2021, 02:15:35 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 27, 2021, 10:36:35 AM
Meghan McCain Cuts Ties With Lindsey Graham: He's 'Not' a 'Member of My Family'

Justin Baragona

Media Reporter
Updated Oct. 27, 2021 12:49PM ET Published Oct. 27, 2021 12:25PM ET

Meghan McCain dramatically kicked Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) to the curb on Wednesday, publicly declaring that the man she once affectionately referred to as an "uncle" is not a "member of my family" and "hasn't been for a very long time."

For years now, Graham has tried to reconcile his close relationship with the late Sen. John McCain and his undying loyalty to disgraced former President Donald Trump, who notoriously attacked McCain and derided the Vietnam POW's war record—even in death.

While Meghan McCain previously said that she refuses to "talk crap" about Graham, despite his "questionable" actions, this week appeared to be the final straw for the former View host.

In her new audiobook memoir, titled Bad Republican, McCain revisited her feud with Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner, calling them "funeral crashers" for showing up at her father's 2018 ceremony. "As far as I knew, they had not been invited but they showed up anyway," she wrote of the ex-president's daughter and son-in-law, colloquially known as "Javanka."

Graham, however, told the Washington Post that McCain was mistaken and that the couple's "presence was approved." Adding that "nobody showed up uninvited," the South Carolina lawmaker said he understood "how stressful all this has been" for McCain and "those who attack her dad will never be forgiven by her."

It had also previously been reported that Graham "had cleared" the couple's funeral invitation with the late senator's widow, Cindy McCain. A source close to Javanka also told the Post that Cindy invited them via Graham. Funeral organizers were also aware that the couple, both senior White House aides at the time, would attend, according to an email reviewed by the Post.

But in response to the Post's report, a spokesperson for Meghan McCain said the conservative pundit "stands by the accuracy of her memoir" and that she "was unaware of any invitation to a member of the Trump family to her father's funeral."

And with Graham publicly siding with the Trump family, McCain then took to Twitter on Wednesday morning to cut ties with the longtime family friend.

"Lindsey Graham may consider himself a member of my family, but he is not and hasn't been for a very long time," she tweeted.

"He certainly doesn't speak for me or my life experiences. Full stop," McCain concluded. "The media should stop treating him like he is an expert on anything McCain related."

Graham did not immediately react to getting the public boot from the McCain family, but Javanka has already responded to the ex-View host's shots at them.

"Jared and Ivanka had about as much interest in attending the funeral as they did the half dozen or so dinner invitations that Ben and Meghan pestered them with after the funeral," a source close to the couple told The Post, referencing McCain and her husband Ben Domenech.

Meghan McCain is nothing in the world but another example of someone riding one of their parents' coattails. Anyway, while I certainly didn't always agree with her father, I'll say that he, at least, conducted himself in a way that was respectable. It seems that there's no denying that Trump has ruined the Republican Party and has turned their entire political and philosophical institution into a circus of distrust, misinformation and anti-intellectualism.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on October 27, 2021, 03:23:50 PM
Quote from: Fëanor on October 27, 2021, 08:26:13 AM
Indeed, it you're going to criticize Moore's film, find the find the errors or hyperbole regarding Canada or Britain.  There there is no serious question of Canadian or British authorities deliberately lying to Moore or anyone.

OTOH, from my communications with American conservatives, I glean that they are subject to a great deal of disingenuous nonsense  the Canadian system in particular coming from the usual sort of unreliable sources.

Sorry, I'm not sure I understand. Are you defending Moore's credulous take on Cuba? And Moore as a documentarian more generally?


In case it got lost in the mix I posted that because 71 said upthread he admires Moore, and I'm sure the full extent of his "knowledge" of Cuba comes from a viewing of this.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on October 27, 2021, 05:45:06 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on October 27, 2021, 02:15:35 PM
Meghan McCain is nothing in the world but another example of someone riding one of their parents' coattails. Anyway, while I certainly didn't always agree with her father, I'll say that he, at least, conducted himself in a way that was respectable. It seems that there's no denying that Trump has ruined the Republican Party and has turned their entire political and philosophical institution into a circus of distrust, misinformation and anti-intellectualism.

Meghan is a bad joke, but it's doubtful that John McCain would have gotten anywhere near the inside of a Navy jet if his father wasn't an admiral.  He was also an awful person (dumped his very loyal first wife for a younger woman), corrupt (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keating_Five), and a warmonger.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on October 27, 2021, 07:04:05 PM
...and the precident-setting elevation of Sarah Palin, of course.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on October 27, 2021, 07:16:06 PM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on October 27, 2021, 07:36:22 AM
Your condescension towards Cubans is disturbing. They are "Florida's problem" because they are "ignorant" and vote Republican. Maybe you can accept that they are people who's political inclinations are colored by their past experience, under a brutal "socialist" dictatorship they they had to take desperate measures to escape. That Democrats have failed to attract Cubans is a failure of the Democratic Party.

Also remember that Florida was part of the Confederacy, and a large part of the state is very much a Southern state. We have cowboys and rodeos here. Years ago while in school at FSU (in Tallahassee, the state capitol, for non-Americans), I attended a Passover seder at a friend's family. His grandmother presided, including ringing the little silver bell to summon the Negro butler and maid to serve the food.
South Florida is heavily cosmopolitan, Orlando less so. The rest is either Jimmy Buffett style beaches or straight out Deep South.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on October 27, 2021, 09:39:07 PM
Quote from: Daverz on October 27, 2021, 05:45:06 PM
Meghan is a bad joke, but it's doubtful that John McCain would have gotten anywhere near the inside of a Navy jet if his father wasn't an admiral.  He was also an awful person (dumped his very loyal first wife for a younger woman), corrupt (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keating_Five), and a warmonger.

And yet, he's a saint compared to Trump. 0:)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: LKB on October 28, 2021, 04:24:22 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on October 27, 2021, 09:39:07 PM
And yet, he's a saint compared to Trump. 0:)

My initial impulse was along the lines of, " Well, DUH. "

But after only a minute's reflection, l realized that as long as the GOP ( Greedy, Obsequious Pussies ) allows Trump the possibility of that party's nomination, there should be no letup in reminding Americans of his threat to our democracy.

So: +1, and apologies to MI for my hasty thoughts.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on October 28, 2021, 06:52:01 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on October 27, 2021, 03:23:50 PM
Sorry, I'm not sure I understand. Are you defending Moore's credulous take on Cuba? And Moore as a documentarian more generally?

In case it got lost in the mix I posted that because 71 said upthread he admires Moore, and I'm sure the full extent of his "knowledge" of Cuba comes from a viewing of this.

Well, I was only saying the Moore's message is likely more correct vis-à-vis Canada or the UK than Cuba if only because the formers' sources were less willing to mislead.

I'm not a huge admirer of Moore myself precisely because he himself is willing to be mislead and, in turn, oversimplify and pass on an unnuanced view to his viewers.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on October 28, 2021, 06:59:06 AM
Quote from: LKB on October 28, 2021, 04:24:22 AM
My initial impulse was along the lines of, " Well, DUH. "

But after only a minute's reflection, l realized that as long as the GOP ( Greedy, Obsequious Pussies ) allows Trump the possibility of that party's nomination, there should be no letup in reminding Americans of his threat to our democracy.

So: +1, and apologies to MI for my hasty thoughts.

No worries. The Republican Party is hardly what it was say 20 or 30 years ago. Now that they have allowed Trump to dominate the party and do anything he wants whether it's fundamentally wrong or morally inhumane, I refuse to believe that there's even one decent Republican left.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on October 28, 2021, 09:04:31 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on October 27, 2021, 09:39:07 PM
And yet, he's a saint compared to Trump. 0:)
Trump is dumber, less honest by far, has lower aspirations, has been much more threatening to our democracy; yet I can't calculate the damage McCain did over the years by his support for American interventions/wars - not that many Democrats aren't similar.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: André Le Nôtre on October 28, 2021, 11:11:27 PM
Didja see Ted Cruz passionately, vehemently defending the right to do the Hitler salute? Gee, I wonder what the next step in the plan crazy thing will be!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on October 29, 2021, 05:36:18 AM
Maybe Cruz will grow a little moustache?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on October 29, 2021, 05:45:05 AM
Quote from: Herman on October 29, 2021, 05:36:18 AM
Maybe Cruz will grow a little moustache?
I disagree with those doing this and I hate Cruz but the context is that they were calling, I think, the school board Nazis and he was, of course, supportive of that. So it's not that they were expressing fascistic ideas. They're crackpots and it's in extremely bad taste. The context does add something though.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: LKB on October 29, 2021, 06:54:47 AM
Quote from: Herman on October 29, 2021, 05:36:18 AM
Maybe Cruz will grow a little moustache?

He'd be better off growing a pair. Might even become a man someday..
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: André Le Nôtre on October 29, 2021, 12:03:05 PM
Quote from: Herman on October 29, 2021, 05:36:18 AM
Maybe Cruz will grow a little moustache?

No, I don't think he would dare usurp his lord and master.

Did you hear Trump is issuing commemorative medallions celebrating his impending 2024 presidential candidacy? They are inscribed with the words:

One People!
One Nation!
One Leader!


Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on October 29, 2021, 03:31:27 PM
Such is the state of things that I cant tell if that's true or not.

If so the "economic anxiety" crowd will pay whatever it costs along with all the Trump and Maga merch and all the rally tickets and all the campaign donations for every new bit offearmongering.

Economic anxiety....how spoilt do you have to be to use a term like that?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: André Le Nôtre on October 29, 2021, 07:43:27 PM
It's a reference to the medallions the Nazis produced to commemorate the annexation of the Sudetenland in 1938. These were inscribed with:

Ein Volk!
Ein Reich!
Ein Führer!


But yes, it is difficult to distinguish between fact and The Onion these days. I can see something like this happening though, because Trump is profoundly ignorant and stupid (and a worthless piece of shit), while certainly a subset of his followers clearly harbors Nazi inclinations.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on October 29, 2021, 07:59:22 PM
Quote from: André Le Nôtre on October 29, 2021, 07:43:27 PM
It's a reference to the medallions the Nazis produced to commemorate the annexation of the Sudetenland in 1938. These were inscribed with:

Ein Volk!
Ein Reich!
Ein Führer!


But yes, it is difficult to distinguish between fact and The Onion these days. I can see something like this happening though, because Trump is profoundly ignorant and stupid (and a worthless piece of shit), while certainly a subset of his followers clearly harbors Nazi inclinations.

Funny but sad...

Knowing full well the source German text, I still believed your original post.  :laugh: :'(
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: André Le Nôtre on October 29, 2021, 08:09:10 PM
And did you hear that Trump--even though he is a tea-totaller--is planning on having rallies in beer halls? But instead of beer, punch will be served!!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on October 30, 2021, 11:42:34 AM
Cross-post:

Since Trump lost the election, the Trumpiest areas of the country have had a death toll 50% higher than blue areas. The GOP is killing its own voters with its own lies. And they don't care.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 01, 2021, 06:21:30 AM
The fix is in.

Donald Trump Is Now the Odds-On Favorite to Be President in 2025 (https://www.thebulwark.com/donald-trump-is-now-the-odd-on-favorite-to-be-president-in-2025/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on November 01, 2021, 09:11:36 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 01, 2021, 06:21:30 AM
The fix is in.

Donald Trump Is Now the Odds-On Favorite to Be President in 2025 (https://www.thebulwark.com/donald-trump-is-now-the-odd-on-favorite-to-be-president-in-2025/)

Haha!! I love it:  yep, it's true Trump is by every reasonable esteem the Republican front-runner for 2024.

For sure Trump will run in '24 apart from serious illness or stopping a bullet or two, (I don't mean to give anyone any ideas :blank:).  And given the USA's idiot system of primaries at the beginning, state control of Federal electors lists & election processes along the way, and ending with the purposely anti-democratic Electoral College, Trump is reasonably the favorite to win.

Lots of Republicans understand the Trump is a de facto criminal and threat to the nation and the world.  However what's more important?  The world or winning the primaries?  No question there.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 02, 2021, 07:48:50 AM
As a mode of thought, "In a world where the dollar is collapsing, the government is collapsing, and only bitcoin can save you," aligns nicely with "I alone can fix it."

Maybe it wasn't a coincidence at all.


Anti-Anti-Crypto (https://www.thebulwark.com/anti-anti-crypto/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 02, 2021, 09:39:30 AM
Personally, I rather fear the worst in Virginia, and that will be a dark watershed for the country as a whole.

Jno. V. Last: 1. Trump Is Rocket Fuel
After getting a backdoor win in 2016 (thanks Director Comey!), Donald Trump was really bad for Republicans. He cost them races all over the map. He lost the House for Republicans. He lost the Senate for Republicans. He was a drag on just about every ticket, nearly always running behind down-ballot R's. And he was rocket fuel for Democrats: Trump was so unpopular that he became a turnout machine for Team Blue.

What we're seeing in Virginia today suggests that Trump has finally gotten to a place where he is an unambiguous net positive for Republican candidates.

By the numbers, Glenn Youngkin should not energize the Republican base. He's a plutocrat who treats the base like a bunch of dopes.

But when the returns come in tonight, watch how Youngkin does in the very reddest counties in Virginia: the places where Confederate fanboy Corey Stewart did great in the 2017 GOP primary.1 We're not just concerned with the percentage of the vote Youngkin gets here, but the total turnout from these counties.

At the same time, watch how Youngkin does in the suburbs to see if he's able to eat into the Democratic margins with college-educated, suburban voters.

I suspect that what we'll see tonight is

(1) Youngkin getting high turnout levels in rural Trump country.

(2) While also making inroads with Democrats in suburban Northern Virginia.

If this happens, the most likely explanation will be that:

Trump is meaningfully on the ballot for Republican base voters—that he has succeeded in energizing them with his claims of election fraud, critical race theory, etc.

But that Trump is simultaneously not on the ballot for Democrats and swing voters, who view him as the irrelevant past with no connection to what they're voting on today.

Historically speaking, this is very strange!

Nixon was not a net-positive for Republicans in the 1974 midterms (or the 1976 general). Republican voters were not energized by loyalty to Nixon and Democrats had not turned the page on him.

Ditto for Herbert Hoover and the Republicans of 1934.

All of which is to say that:

The linkage between Trump and Republican voters is something new.

It is unambiguously helping Republican candidates.

Democrats have no idea how to counter it.

Or at least that's my working hypothesis going into tonight. But that's the top level.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 02, 2021, 03:44:41 PM
It's gonna be a long, tense night in The Old Dominion:

Virginia Governor

Glenn Youngkin (R) leads by 66,732 votes over Terry McAuliffe (D) with an estimated 17 percent of votes counted.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 02, 2021, 06:52:00 PM
looking like a wrap: 92% of the vote counted, and Youngkin leading by 115K votes.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on November 03, 2021, 04:20:36 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 02, 2021, 06:52:00 PM
looking like a wrap: 92% of the vote counted, and Youngkin leading by 115K votes.

The minutiae of American politics is obscure and tedious to foreign observers.

Anyway, in this case was a Youngkin-Trump connection a big factor in Youngkin's win?  Word is that Trump isn't very popular in VA and that Youngkin downplayed any connection.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 03, 2021, 05:05:16 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on November 03, 2021, 04:20:36 AM
The minutiae of American politics is obscure and tedious to foreign observers.

Anyway, in this case was a Youngkin-Trump connection a big factor in Youngkin's win?  Word is that Trump isn't very popular in VA and that Youngkin downplayed any connection.
The arrogance of the Dem activists who never learn the lesson. Identity politics and woke "theory" will drag them down in big elections. It's divide and conquer only, with Dems, they do it to themselves. It's a shame because republican economic policy can't really make things better for working folk. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 03, 2021, 06:15:45 AM
Aaron Blake:

1. Bad news — and omens — for Democrats

The reason we focus on Virginia and New Jersey isn't because we love them so much (though some of us do). It's because these states are the only ones to vote statewide on this particular Election Day. And they provide pretty clear indicators of how the two parties are doing.

It's not a pretty picture for Democrats.

Youngkin is currently defeating former governor Terry McAuliffe (D) by about two points — a 12-point swing on net from 2020.

In New Jersey, Republican Jack Ciattarelli turned Murphy's reelection race into an unexpected nail-biter. With approximately 87 percent of the ballots cast, he's at 49.7 percent to Murphy's 49.6 percent. That's currently a 16-point shift from last year.

(Republicans also notably fared well in New York state, particularly Long Island.)

Recent history suggests those kinds of shifts, more often than not, mean such a party is in line for a good midterm election the following year. In fact, in five of the past seven post-presidential Election Days, the party that over-performed its presidential vote margins from the previous year in these races went on to flip the House, the Senate or both a year later.

Republicans only need to win five House seats and one Senate seat to do that. Tuesday showed they have the wind at their back, and they don't need much of a gust.

That doesn't mean anything is set in stone, but even before Tuesday night, it was clear this wasn't going to be an affirmation of Democrats' electoral superiority. And it was far from that. They'll now have to figure out how to avoid anything close to a repeat in a year's time.

2. A road map for the GOP after(?) Trump

The Virginia governor's race was an interesting proposition when it comes to former president Donald Trump. While Democrats didn't generally focus that much on Trump in such races before — perhaps because Trump was so ever-present anyway — McAuliffe pushed the issue, and hard. He tried to turn Youngkin into Trump in khakis and a fleece vest.

Two lessons:

It didn't work.

The result was not an affirmation of Trump.

Exit polls showed a majority of voters viewed Youngkin favorably, compared to 42 percent who said the same for Trump. Youngkin was also winning 17 percent of voters who viewed Trump unfavorably, which is a big number.

Trump's 42 percent favorable rating was also slightly lower than his 44 percent approval rating in 2020 Virginia exit polls, though not outside the margin of error.

Not to make everything about Trump, but the GOP's ability to distance itself from him — and Democrats' ability or inability to tie Republicans to him — matters in upcoming elections, especially with Trump out of office.

Youngkin provided a road map for the GOP when Trump isn't front-of-mind for most people. Whether Trump will stay so out-of-mind ahead of the 2024 election is a very relevant question.

What also matters is whether Republicans can actually put forward candidates like Youngkin and perhaps Ciattarelli who can effectively craft their own brand. That's especially true given how much some top GOP Senate candidates have tied themselves to Trump in the service of winning primaries — and how much Republicans might nominate candidates more extreme and with more baggage than Youngkin because they have Trump's backing.

3. The pivotal school issue

The temptation after every race is to talk about how everything the winner did worked and everything the loser did failed. Things are often much more nuanced than that. And given that the national environment seemed to matter quite a bit — see: New Jersey and Republicans apparently sweeping the other statewide Virginia races — we can't lay this all at McAuliffe's feet.

But the top of the ballot matters. And even aside from McAuliffe's failure to tar Youngkin with Trump, there was his inability to shake the school issue.

McAuliffe birthed what seemed like a million attack ads when he uttered, "I don't think parents should be telling schools what they should teach." Weeks later, his campaign effectively affirmed this comment was hurting him by running an ad explaining the whole thing.

In isolation, it might have been survivable, but the backdrop was unhappiness with how the state's schools handled reopening amid the coronavirus pandemic and a controversy over sexual assault in highly important Loudoun County in Northern Virginia.

Exit polls showed 51 percent of voters said parents should have "a lot" of say over what schools teach, while 33 percent said they should have "some." Another 13 percent said either "not much" or "none at all."

Youngkin also won 58 percent of men with children, compared to the 49 percent Trump took last year.

Loudoun proved to be big for Youngkin. He narrowed Biden's 25-point win there in 2020 to just more than a 10-point advantage for McAuliffe.

4. Setbacks for the far-left

Moving beyond Virginia: To the extent some on the left might argue that the antidote for the above is for the party to move further to the left, there was plenty to rebut that.

Speaking of comments that didn't wear well on voters, there's the whole "defund the police" movement that was spurred amid racial-justice protests — especially after George Floyd was murdered by police in Minneapolis. Democratic leaders seemed to pretty quickly recognize the problems with that talking point, and tried to nip it in the bud.

Election results in Minneapolis on Tuesday validated that position. A proposal to replace the Minneapolis police department with a public-safety department run by the city council failed by a strong margin — in a very blue city with that very recent past.

Meanwhile in Buffalo, democratic socialist India Walton, who pulled off a shocking upset of Mayor Byron Brown for the Democratic nomination, was losing by a wide margin to the write-in option, which seems very likely to be overwhelmingly composed of Brown voters.

Losing to a write-in candidate would be a pretty remarkable feat. We saw a similar scenario in the 2010 Alaska Senate race when Republican nominee Joe Miller lost to Sen. Lisa Murkowski's (R) write-in campaign after defeating her in a primary. The reason: Voters overall overwhelmingly disliked Miller, even in a friendly electorate for the party.

In Seattle, moderate former city council president Bruce Harrell held a commanding lead in the mayoral race over more-liberal current city council President Lorena González. And that's all on top of New York's widely expected election of Eric Adams, who ran as a relatively moderate candidate in that high-profile Democratic primary.

Further-left candidates did win other mayoral races. In Pittsburgh, state Rep. Ed Gainey (D) won after defeating the incumbent mayor in a primary, and in Boston, Elizabeth Warren-backed Michelle Wu defeated a more-moderate opponent. Both are Democrats.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 03, 2021, 06:21:31 AM
The further-left mayoral candidate winning in Boston is close to non-news (on that head—that she's the first woman, first person of color and first Asian-American to serve Boston as mayor is big news)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on November 03, 2021, 07:25:15 AM
I don't fault Joe Biden for what he is trying to do and has achieved, but the reality is that he doesn't have a governing majority. The Senate is a 50-50 tie (requiring Kamala Harris to break tie votes) so he can't loose a single vote, and two Senators in the Democratic Caucus might as well be Republicans. Manchin is from overwhelmingly Republican West Virginia and beats Republican candidates by being the seemingly more sensible version of a Republican. He makes his living as a coal broker, and is expected to support renewable energy support. If he supports Biden's climate plans he will suffer financial loss and get voted out. As for Sinema, she is a paradox. She started out as a Green party member and a progressive, and now has morphed into a conservative. Some suggest it is because she is beholden to her political donors.

If the people in this country want a progressive agenda they should vote for progressive candidates.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on November 03, 2021, 07:35:30 AM
Quote from: milk on November 03, 2021, 05:05:16 AM
The arrogance of the Dem activists who never learn the lesson. Identity politics and woke "theory" will drag them down in big elections. It's divide and conquer only, with Dems, they do it to themselves. It's a shame because republican economic policy can't really make things better for working folk.

What "woke" "theory"?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 03, 2021, 07:44:47 AM
Chas Sykes:

Terry McAuliffe Bet on Voters Hating Trump. Turns Out They Dislike Democrats More.

The Republican Party — populated with cranks, crooks, clowns, bigots and deranged conspiracy theorists — has spent five years alienating women, minorities and young voters.

The party — and its entire leadership from the grassroots to Congress — remains in thrall to a disgraced, defeated, one-term president, who is reduced to issuing increasingly crazed screeds from his exile in Mar-a-Lago. Every day we learn more about Republican complicity in the events of Jan. 6 and their attempts to whitewash an attempted coup.

The GOP is the party of Marjorie Taylor Greene, Lauren Boebert, Matt Gaetz and Louie Gohmert.


Sane Republicans are heading for the exits, even as assaults on democratic norms have become a litmus test of loyalty.

So, now, Democrats need to ask themselves this rather urgent question:

Why can't we beat these guys?

Tuesday night, Democrats lost the governorship of Virginia — a state Joe Biden won by 10 points — to a Donald Trump-endorsed candidate, who ran up massive margins in rural parts of the state and made inroads into the once reliably blue suburbs.

There are obvious caveats and rationalizations available: Virginia has a long history of voting against the party in the White House in off-year elections; and Democrats did, in fact, beat Republicans in 2018 and 2020. They control both houses of Congress and the presidency.

But even with Joe Biden's slumping poll numbers, Virginia should have been a firewall. As political guru Reuben Rodriguez (who nailed the 2020 results) noted, Virginia is a "Dem dream." It has the highest concentration of tuned-in highly educated white people in the country in northern Virginia. It has large African American centers in Richmond and "very diverse suburbs that are ground zero for Trump disgust."

"This," he tweeted hours before the Democratic defeat, "is a state that should not vote red."

But it did. And thus Virginia became the latest in a series of warning signs for the Democrats, who suffered unexpected losses in congressional and state-level elections despite defeating Trump last year.

So this seems a good time to ask hard questions that I suspect Democrats won't appreciate.

Glenn Youngkin may have run as a quasi-post-Trumpian candidate, but across the country, Republicans continue to beclown themselves with lies about the election, even as they become more extreme on issues from guns to abortion.

But then why does a new NBC poll give Republicans double-digit leads on issues like border security, inflation, crime, the economy, national security and even on "getting things done"?

Why are Democrats facing the possibility of a Republican wave in 2022, and — even more ominous — the restoration of the Trump presidency in 2024?

Why can't they beat these guys, even in a state as blue as Virginia?

Democrats have been busy constructing excuses for their lack of success. They blame dark money, gerrymandering, racism, the right-wing media ecosystem.

But none of the self-soothing explanations account for what has been a clear erosion in support not merely in rural areas, but also among suburbanites and Black and Hispanic voters.

Democrats are also learning that without Trump himself on the ballot, they had merely rented some of the suburban votes that had shifted their way in the last two cycles. Running against Trump is apparently not a winning formula when the former president is merely a spectral presence.

Even so, many progressives still seem reluctant to engage in any sort of deeper introspection into why they may have alienated former members of their base. Many prefer to cling to the concept of "asymmetric polarization" that blames the widening split solely on conservatives because Republicans have moved farther to the right than Democrats have to the left.

But that view was challenged earlier this year by Kevin Drum, who cited studies showing that, in fact, it had been Democrats who had drifted to the left on issues like immigration, guns, religion and gay marriage.

It is not "both-sides-ism" to point this out. Like others, I have written hundreds of thousands of words about how the Republicans have not only moved hard to the right, but have also gone mad in the process. So this does not suggest any sort of moral equivalence.

The derangement of the GOP, however, has tended to obscure what happened on the left, where elite Democrats have increasingly lost touch with many of the voters who will determine the outcome of the next few elections.

At soccer matches and PTA meetings, or other gatherings of suburban parents, you won't hear talk of "intersectionality," or debates about the proper use of pronouns. The words "autocracy" or "authoritarianism" seldom come up; and if you try to define the terms, it's as likely as not that people will bring up mask and vaccine mandates, cancel culture and what they see as the overreach of the progressive nanny state. References to "white supremacy" are likely to be greeted or with eye rolls or treated as conversation-ending insults.

At times, it seems as if Democrats are speaking a different language than many Americans. This is what veteran democratic strategist James Carville was talking about when he told Vox:

You ever get the sense that people in faculty lounges in fancy colleges use a different language than ordinary people? They come up with a word like 'Latinx' that no one else uses. Or they use a phrase like 'communities of color.' I don't know anyone who speaks like that. I don't know anyone who lives in a 'community of color.' I know lots of white and Black and brown people and they all live in ... neighborhoods.

Unfortunately, this disconnect has been accelerated by the shift in the balance of power and influence in the Democratic party. "Liberal college graduates, especially liberal white college graduates, have gained a sort of hegemony in the nation's elite media, foundations and NGOs, in academic and cultural institutions and in the staffing of the Democratic party's infrastructure," writes Ruy Teixeira. "This hegemony sets the tone for the Democratic party's commitments and rhetoric on sociocultural issues."

This has had real world consequences.

Even though Democrats have succeeded in getting a much larger share of college-educated voters, educational polarization has been very much a double-edged sword because they have been losing ground among working-class voters, who greatly outnumber the college-educated electorate. (Nationally, according to 2020 Catalist data, the electorate is 63 percent non-college/37 percent college).

Teixeira has warned that if this pattern continues, "with the college-educated moving toward the Democrats while the working-class becomes more Republican, equal-sized shifts favor the GOP."

But there is worse news.

In 2020, Teixeira notes, working-class non-whites swung toward Trump by 12 points, "despite Democratic messaging that focused relentlessly on Trump's animus toward nonwhites." This may not have been a one-off. "Since 2012, running against Trump twice," he writes, "Democrats have lost 18 points off of their margin among nonwhite, working-class voters."

If this continues, Democrats will be in a world of hurt.

But this is, in part, a result of the shift in the Democratic Party itself. As educational polarization has increased, white college-educated liberals have come to dominate the party, even though, as David Shor has noted, the white liberals who staff the campaigns and shape the party's messaging "are more left-wing than Black and Hispanic Democrats on pretty much every issue: taxes, health care, policing and even on racial issues or various measures of 'racial resentment.'"

The result, says Shor, is that as "white liberals increasingly define the party's image and messaging, that's going to turn off nonwhite conservative Democrats and push them against us."

That is, of course, only part of the reason Democrats lost in Virginia. The Biden administration has stumbled on Afghanistan, inflation, supply chains, the border and boosters. Congressional Democrats have spent months locked in a murder-suicide pact over spending.

Trump wasn't on the ballot, and Youngkin kept him at a discreet distance from actual swing voters. His attack on critical race theory, though often cynical and dishonest, proved unexpectedly potent. Terry McAuliffe was a political retread who proved an uninspiring candidate.

But Democrats need to understand that bigger spending bills won't solve those problems if they fail to find a way to connect to the voters they most desperately need.

And, right now, it is not working.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on November 03, 2021, 10:33:24 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on November 03, 2021, 07:35:30 AM
What "woke" "theory"?
That's a pretty broad term, but I understand the term "woke" to encompass modern feminism/intersectionality/white guilt/LGBT activism. More like ideology mixed with theory in all of that. Unless milk is referring to CRT.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on November 03, 2021, 11:03:36 AM
Yes, I know "woke" is the right's latest iteration "of "Politically Correct", which I guess wasn't getting the knee-jerk reactions anymore so something new was needed, and like PC its a term nobody on the left outside of the fringiest fringe would self-apply. Likewise what the right calls critical race theory.

I meant specifically. Which "woke theories" did the democrats or the candidate put forward to damage this election?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: amw on November 03, 2021, 11:45:08 AM
In areas of southwest Virginia, where most inhabitants identify as some variety of neo-Confederates, arguments involving parents who were uncomfortable with their children reading books about slavery in schools or statues of Robert E. Lee being removed, and that this constituted a "war on whiteness", did appear to motivate voters, but the population of those areas is small (and shrinking over time). Most of Virginia is suburban and part of the DMV (Washington metropolitan area) where the most commonly cited issue, at least by voters I'm aware of, was extended school closures and COVID-19-related restrictions, which they felt had been mismanaged by the previous governor's administration.

It's also worth noting that at only one point in the past ~40 years has the president's party won the Virginia governor's race, and that was during a year of economic recovery (2013) with a fairly popular president. Partisanship trends have mostly solidified on the federal level, but ruling parties tend to be unpopular, and this is no more surprising than, say, Democrats winning the governorship of Kansas in 2018.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on November 03, 2021, 07:44:16 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on November 03, 2021, 11:03:36 AM
Yes, I know "woke" is the right's latest iteration "of "Politically Correct", which I guess wasn't getting the knee-jerk reactions anymore so something new was needed, and like PC its a term nobody on the left outside of the fringiest fringe would self-apply.
Ah yes, that's true, but at the same time, I'd rather consider it more like "PC 2.0," because "Politically Correct" is an older term which doesn't bring into mind the more modern and prominent leftist ideologies. Everything is moving leftward over time, even moderates are politically correct nowadays, we can't say some words now that were less controversial in the past, more recently words like "tranny" are starting to become considered as slurs, for example. But "woke" is a step further, not only is that stuff a given, but it also includes the far left racist and sexist attitudes toward white people/males which has only festered over the years recently, all that goes beyond simple political correctness.


Quote from: SimonNZ on November 03, 2021, 11:03:36 AM
I meant specifically. Which "woke theories" did the democrats or the candidate put forward to damage this election?
I'll let milk answer that, but the word "will" was used, so I don't think the implication that it has (yet)? but maybe that it will?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 04, 2021, 04:28:02 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on November 03, 2021, 07:35:30 AM
What "woke" "theory"?
This is a swamp of a discussion but the race seems to have partially turned on education and the moment is when Terry Mcauliffe said (something like) that parents shouldn't tell schools what to teach or have a role in curricula. I would say to look to someone like John McWhorter to understand something of what's gone wrong with the left. It's identitarianism and these new religious ideologies centered on oppression. 
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/71xzDY+E0NS.jpg)
Look to Minnesota as well...
Minneapolis voters reject replacing police with new agency
https://apnews.com/article/2021-election-minneapolis-cc108d1707d9cb8cbaa6135bb60e7fbd (https://apnews.com/article/2021-election-minneapolis-cc108d1707d9cb8cbaa6135bb60e7fbd)
...for a look at logical consequences.
I really fear for American. As it goes, so goes the rest of the world.
Here's a read:
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/us/democrats-must-look-beyond-joe-biden-and-kamala-harris-for-2024-1.4717320
(https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/us/democrats-must-look-beyond-joe-biden-and-kamala-harris-for-2024-1.4717320)
Democrats must look beyond Joe Biden and Kamala Harris for 2024

US Politics: Donald Trump could face a beatable opponent through sheer Democratic inertia

"It is not too soon for Democrats (and democrats) to start worrying about 2024. Absent health or legal trouble, a twice-impeached Donald Trump is the likeliest Republican candidate. If he is to lose again, the alternative will have to sell well in Michigan, Wisconsin and other decisive states. It is not clear that Harris or, after three more years of wear and tear, even Biden will meet that test. Everything about the Democratic Party's ingrained culture suggests it will field one of the two regardless..."
"...Whatever the teleologists say, a nation's history can hinge on the right person showing up at an opportune time, or failing to. Senator Amy Klobuchar, transportation secretary Pete Buttigieg, congresswoman Ayanna Pressley: none of the mooted challengers emits a "person of destiny" aura."

Democrats stuck on corporate-friendly divisive ideologies will guarantee a republican congress elected next November and a big fat ruddy Trump ready to dismember American government and society in 2024. A lot of things will be too late to save by then, maybe including the planet. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 04, 2021, 11:49:03 AM
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-11-04/virginia-new-jersey-election-results-worse-than-democrats-realize

This is a very good article. You may be able to get around paywall via Google.

Before Tuesday's elections I warned against overinterpreting the Virginia gubernatorial election as a national bellwether. I stand by that: Governor's races are the kind of election that shows the least correlation with national politics, and where candidate attributes and issues make the biggest difference.

But if you're a Democrat looking for some good news in the wake of Republican Glenn Youngkin's triumph over Democrat Terry McAuliffe, I have some bad news: Republicans did well in a bunch of other elections, too.

...
Democrats, meanwhile, ought to remember that Biden's diminished public standing is of relatively recent vintage. As recently as last summer, his approval rating was well above water, and the sophisticated take was he was doing about as well as one could hope in an era of high polarization. It then collapsed rapidly as oil prices soared, job growth slowed, and the delta wave alarmed Covid hawks even as vaccine mandates annoyed Covid doves. Meanwhile, congressional Democrats have chosen the worst possible option: loudly debating sweeping progressive policies that take some of the moderate sheen off Biden without actually passing progressive policies and making their proponents happy.
The White House and Congress desperately need to figure out what they want to do on the Build Back Better agenda. Then they need to do it and move on to addressing the more pressing concerns of jobs, wages, and quality of life.



Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on November 04, 2021, 01:17:01 PM
Quote from: T. D. on November 04, 2021, 11:49:03 AM
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-11-04/virginia-new-jersey-election-results-worse-than-democrats-realize

This is a very good article. You may be able to get around paywall via Google.

Before Tuesday's elections I warned against overinterpreting the Virginia gubernatorial election as a national bellwether. I stand by that: Governor's races are the kind of election that shows the least correlation with national politics, and where candidate attributes and issues make the biggest difference.

But if you're a Democrat looking for some good news in the wake of Republican Glenn Youngkin's triumph over Democrat Terry McAuliffe, I have some bad news: Republicans did well in a bunch of other elections, too.

...
Democrats, meanwhile, ought to remember that Biden's diminished public standing is of relatively recent vintage. As recently as last summer, his approval rating was well above water, and the sophisticated take was he was doing about as well as one could hope in an era of high polarization. It then collapsed rapidly as oil prices soared, job growth slowed, and the delta wave alarmed Covid hawks even as vaccine mandates annoyed Covid doves. Meanwhile, congressional Democrats have chosen the worst possible option: loudly debating sweeping progressive policies that take some of the moderate sheen off Biden without actually passing progressive policies and making their proponents happy.
The White House and Congress desperately need to figure out what they want to do on the Build Back Better agenda. Then they need to do it and move on to addressing the more pressing concerns of jobs, wages, and quality of life.


I'm not a progressive and even I can see the obvious retort: BBB is all about jobs and quality of life.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 04, 2021, 01:30:15 PM
Another good article, though it's more likely to be paywalled:

https://www.economist.com/leaders/2021/11/06/the-calamity-facing-joe-biden-and-the-democrats

The president needs to distance himself from his party's left fringe

...
The problem is not just Mr Biden, though. His party's left-wing, college-educated activist class consistently assumes that the electorate holds the same attitudes on race and on the role of the government as they do. Virginia is the latest example of this folly. America is a young, diverse country. The median age is under 40 and just 60% of the country identifies as white. The electorate is different. Taking an average of the 2018 and 2014 mid-terms as a guide, 75% of voters will be white and their median age next year will be 53. Democrats have a huge lead among the college-educated. But only 36% of Americans completed four-year degrees. That is far too small a base, especially as Republicans make inroads with non-white voters.
...
Countering the Republican message that he carries out the wishes of the radical left will require Mr Biden to be much tougher on his party's fringe. That may mean doing things they hate. He could campaign to hire more police officers in cities where the murder rate has spiked ("refund the police", perhaps), or pick fights with the school board in San Francisco, which thinks that Abraham Lincoln is a symbol of white supremacy.

If Democrats believe that grubby attempts to win power are beneath them, then they should look at what is happening in the Republican Party. Glenn Youngkin's election as governor of Virginia suggests that Republicans can win in swing states, even with Mr Trump as head of the party, by being cheerful, Reaganesque culture warriors who know how to throw red meat to the base. In a two-candidate race for the presidency, both nearly always have a real chance of winning. Mr Biden and his party need to think hard about what they are prepared to do to limit the risk of another four years of Mr Trump. Because that is where a failed Biden presidency could well lead.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 04, 2021, 01:52:53 PM
Quote from: JBS on November 04, 2021, 01:17:01 PM
I'm not a progressive and even I can see the obvious retort: BBB is all about jobs and quality of life.

Look, I'm very strongly Democrat. Mostly by default*, as I loathe the GQP and would rather die than vote for it, but politics is often about settling for the lesser (in this case, much lesser) evil.
Just one simple request: Give me a clear 1-paragraph definition of BBB.

*Yes, an attractive third party would be great, but show me an electable one.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on November 04, 2021, 04:24:44 PM
Quote from: T. D. on November 04, 2021, 01:52:53 PM
Look, I'm very strongly Democrat. Mostly by default*, as I loathe the GQP and would rather die than vote for it, but politics is often about settling for the lesser (in this case, much lesser) evil.
Just one simple request: Give me a clear 1-paragraph definition of BBB.

*Yes, an attractive third party would be great, but show me an electable one.

I understand the point you're making and fully agree with it, and with the Economist article you linked.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 04, 2021, 05:00:17 PM
Quote from: T. D. on November 04, 2021, 01:52:53 PM
Yes, an attractive third party would be great, but show me an electable one.

I wish I saw a path to having anyone other than Trump in the White House in Jan 2025. Maybe my brain's just weary of it all.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 04, 2021, 05:33:42 PM
https://thehill.com/homenews/media/579991-carville-blames-stupid-wokeness-for-democratic-losses (https://thehill.com/homenews/media/579991-carville-blames-stupid-wokeness-for-democratic-losses)
Carville blames 'stupid wokeness' for Democratic losses

"What went wrong is just stupid wokeness. Don't just look at Virginia and New Jersey. Look at Long Island, look at Buffalo, look at Minneapolis, even look at Seattle, Wash. I mean, this 'defund the police' lunacy, this take Abraham Lincoln's name off of schools. I mean that - people see that," Carville said.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 05, 2021, 01:08:12 AM
Quote from: milk on November 04, 2021, 05:33:42 PM
https://thehill.com/homenews/media/579991-carville-blames-stupid-wokeness-for-democratic-losses (https://thehill.com/homenews/media/579991-carville-blames-stupid-wokeness-for-democratic-losses)
Carville blames 'stupid wokeness' for Democratic losses

"What went wrong is just stupid wokeness. Don't just look at Virginia and New Jersey. Look at Long Island, look at Buffalo, look at Minneapolis, even look at Seattle, Wash. I mean, this 'defund the police' lunacy, this take Abraham Lincoln's name off of schools. I mean that - people see that," Carville said.

Carville should just shut the #@! up by now, instead of talking out of both sides of his yapper. He's got zero bona fides.

This continuous harping about those stray wokesters is just ridiculous if you look at what's going on in the GQP. That party is not beset by a few radicals, it has been completely taken over by zealots who are quietly enjoying the way people tar the Ds as wokesters.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 05, 2021, 03:52:17 AM
Quote from: Herman on November 05, 2021, 01:08:12 AM
Carville should just shut the #@! up by now, instead of talking out of both sides of his yapper. He's got zero bona fides.

This continuous harping about those stray wokesters is just ridiculous if you look at what's going on in the GQP. That party is not beset by a few radicals, it has been completely taken over by zealots who are quietly enjoying the way people tar the Ds as wokesters.
How to defeat the republicans? How? This is as good as handing the keys of government over to the republicans wholesale. And the repercussions are going to be devastating, not only to working people of all ethnic backgrounds but to the planet.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/indiana-school-admin-explains-schools-205752960.html (https://www.yahoo.com/news/indiana-school-admin-explains-schools-205752960.html)
Indiana school admin explains how schools teach CRT without using that term: 'We're lying'

..."When we tell you that our schools aren't teaching Critical Race Theory, that it's nowhere in our standards, that's misdirection," Indianapolis district science coordinator, instructional coach, and administrator Tony Kinnett posted on Twitter Thursday...Kinnett explained that he is an administrator in the largest school district in Indiana which means he is present in "dozens of classrooms a week" so he "sees exactly what we are teaching our students."

"We don't have the quotes and theories as state standards per se," Kinnett said. "We do have Critical Race Theory in how we teach."

Kinnett continued, "We tell our teachers to treat our students differently based on color. We tell our students every problem is a result of 'white men' and that everything Western Civilization built is racist. Capitalism is a tool of white supremacy. Those are straight out of Kimberle Crenshaw's main points verbatim in 'Critical Race Theory: The Key Writings that Formed the Movement.'"

...In a Twitter thread, Kinnett posted screenshots of emails he says show school officials instructing teachers to tell parents Critical Race Theory is not taught in schools along with slides from a presentation acknowledging that it is indeed taught in schools...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 05, 2021, 04:42:57 AM
"Kinnett explained that he is an administrator in the largest school district in Indiana which means he is present in "dozens of classrooms a week" so he "sees exactly what we are teaching our students."

Really?

Typically, administrators are in their office and they talk to fellow managers.

The usual complaint is that administrators don't know what's going on in classrooms.

This is not to say there is no talk about the history of race / racism in America (as there should be, in 2021); it's just that his "Hey psst: I know what it's like" doesn't make sense.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 05, 2021, 05:28:07 AM
Quote from: Herman on November 05, 2021, 04:42:57 AM
"Kinnett explained that he is an administrator in the largest school district in Indiana which means he is present in "dozens of classrooms a week" so he "sees exactly what we are teaching our students."

Really?

Typically, administrators are in their office and they talk to fellow managers.

The usual complaint is that administrators don't know what's going on in classrooms.

This is not to say there is no talk about the history of race / racism in America (as there should be, in 2021); it's just that his "Hey psst: I know what it's like" doesn't make sense.
Democrats cannot afford to regress on gains they made during trum years. Loudoun County Virginia voted overwhelmingly for Biden; it is one of the most educated counties in America. McAuliffe lost Loudoun decisively. This was an epicenter of the fight over schools. This election is a disaster for Democrats. They need these places to beat trum in 2024. Tump sailing in will be a catastrophe. What is the message of Democrats next year and in 2024?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: amw on November 05, 2021, 05:30:32 AM
Perhaps what we need is to dissolve the people and elect another.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on November 05, 2021, 05:55:27 AM
The recent election in Virginia has really depressed me.

The racist element of Youngkin's campaign is really bothersome.

My daughter-in-law is Korean.  I have two wonderful grandchildren.  What kind of country are they going to live in if the racists get control?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: geralmar on November 05, 2021, 09:18:10 AM
(https://i.postimg.cc/hv1rkLYj/HT5-Y4-WZBG5-EQDPTCOJ2-Q5-WN7-LY.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 10, 2021, 10:04:12 AM
One of Trump's "beautiful people"

Capitol rioter who hit officer gets over 3 years in prison
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 10, 2021, 10:09:43 AM
Federal Judge Smacks Down Trump's Executive Privilege Claim

But appeals could keep his White House records relating to the Big Lie out of the hands of the January 6th committee until after the midterms—when it might cease to exist. (https://www.thebulwark.com/federal-judge-smacks-down-trumps-executive-privilege-claim/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on November 10, 2021, 01:32:00 PM
Reuters unmasks Trump supporters who terrified U.S. election officials
Law enforcement has taken little action as backers of Donald Trump aim stark threats at election officials. Reuters tracked down nine of the harassers. Most were unrepentant. (https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-election-threats/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 10, 2021, 01:54:37 PM
Trumpkins feel it's their right to harrass/bully. Pathetic!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on November 10, 2021, 04:15:04 PM
Quote from: geralmar on November 05, 2021, 09:18:10 AM
(https://i.postimg.cc/hv1rkLYj/HT5-Y4-WZBG5-EQDPTCOJ2-Q5-WN7-LY.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

The GOP has also been suppressing their own voters...permanently.

(https://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/covid-2021.jpg)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 11, 2021, 08:24:27 AM
Opinion: A sobering, new report shows how much work is needed to protect democracy

By Jennifer Rubin, Columnist

Protect Democracy, a nonpartisan group that has done yeoman's work in litigating against the lawless Trump administration, devising software tools to enhance election integrity and battling election disinformation, is out with a comprehensive report of the status of democracy. It makes for a sobering read.

If nothing else, the report highlights that the danger of election subversion and the ensuing constitutional crisis is immediate and real. Republicans have pushed more than 200 bills around the country that would enable Republican legislatures to dislodge neutral election officials, challenge and overturn results and undermine confidence in election outcomes. For other elections they do not win, expect Republicans to try to delegitimize the results. (This playbook is already in use in New Jersey, where Republicans are fanning false claims of voting irregularities in the governor's race. If devices were in place in the state for Republicans to politicize voting administration, election turmoil would no doubt persist.)

Protect Democracy notes that efforts at the federal level, including in the compromise Freedom to Vote Act, must be coupled with lobbying, legal challenges and public education at the state level.

The effort to prevent delegitimization of elections also requires the debunking and challenging of phony elections "audits," such as the one conducted in Maricopa County, Ariz. (which turned out to confirm President Biden's victory). These are the preseason warm-ups to anticipated GOP efforts in 2022 and 2024 to sabotage vote tabulation and certification.

It is worth noting that such efforts must also include fixes to the Electoral Count Act to prevent a possible Republican House majority in January 2025 from accomplishing what the MAGA rioters could not: Overthrowing the will of voters by refusing to certify electoral college votes.

To combat the near-term threat, Protect Democracy also insists on accountability for attempted intimidation and manipulation of election officials in 2020 through civil and criminal litigation. The report warns that "if there is no accountability for past abuses, they will only repeat themselves more dangerously."

Beyond the immediate danger of disrupted and stolen elections, Protect Democracy continues to highlight intermediate steps to shore up the guardrails of democracy including passage of a bill it helped formulate, the Protecting Our Democracy Act, reform of the War Powers Act and efforts to rebalance power between the "ever more imperial executive and a hollowed out and broken Congress."

As essential as the short- and intermediate-term reforms may be, a more fundamental threat looms. Protect Democracy calls this the "structural and cultural factors that inflate the political power and appeal of authoritarianism." The "socio-cultural drivers" of a mass movement seeking to challenge the foundations of a multiracial democracy demand solutions well beyond the political realm.

This entails confronting the White evangelical crusade to prioritize White power and Christian ideology over democracy. Right-wing pseudo-intellectuals, unabashed champions of nativism in right-wing media and cynical Republican politicians have heightened racial resentment and undermined the building blocks of democracy. In many instances, however, they are merely racing to catch up with the mob.

The prevalence of conspiracy theories, flight from science and fear of marginalization point to a greater crisis in rural, White and evangelical communities. White evangelicals' Faustian bargain with Trump and his movement meant that these communities sacrificed their religious virtues and principles for power and the false sense of security that a ruthless warrior could push back the tide of secularism and racial diversification. As evangelical conservative and pro-democracy advocate David A. French writes, "[T]he pursuit of Christian power led to prominent Christian voices endorsing nation-cracking litigation and revolutionary efforts to overturn a lawful election — the Christian 'deal' looks bad indeed. When push came to shove, all too often the pursuit of justice yielded to the pursuit of power."

Reinvigoration of democratic values, inculcation of tolerance, renewed respect for diversity and acceptance of science must come from authentic voices with credibility in those communities. The rest of Americans must recognize that excusing the plague of racist authoritarianism and unhinged — sometimes violent — rhetoric as the result of "economic dislocation" or "lack of respect from elites" misses the mark and infantilizes millions of Americans.

These Americans need to decide if they believe in the American creed or simply want to impose their will on a nation in which they no longer represent a majority. The answer to that fundamental question will in large part determine the fate of our democratic experiment.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 11, 2021, 08:42:56 AM
And, the media fails the Public again:

How the media missed a New Jersey senate candidate's racist social media posts — until he'd already won.

By Paul Farhi

Yesterday at 7:00 a.m. EST

Edward Durr was such a long-shot candidate in his New Jersey state Senate race that no one seemed to notice something rather striking about him: He had a history of posting bigoted, misogynistic and derogatory comments on social media.

"Mohammed was a pedophile!" he wrote in 2019 in a tweet that also described Islam as "a false religion" and "a cult of hate." In other online posts since last year, he has called the coronavirus "the China virus," blamed an "influx of #illegalAliens" for spreading disease, used the motto of the far-right QAnon conspiracy movement and compared vaccination mandates to the Holocaust. He also denigrated Vice President Harris on Facebook, writing that she had earned her position only as a result of her race and gender.

Yet none of it rated news coverage, even after Durr, a commercial truck driver who had never held office, became the Republican nominee for New Jersey's 3rd Legislative District in April. According to a search of the Nexis database, which catalogues thousands of news sources, there were no published or broadcast reports about Durr's posts in the six months leading up to Election Day.

Durr's comments made plenty of news after last week's election, when reporters finally caught up to his social media history. But by then he had already scored a stunning upset over Democrat Steve Sweeney, one of the state's most powerful officials. Durr, 58, won the Senate seat by roughly 2,200 votes out of 65,000 cast.

One of the media's basic functions is to serve as a watchdog, particularly in scrutinizing candidates for public office. But in Durr's case, the watchdogs failed to bark for years.

His incendiary posts date back to at least 2017, when he called U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) a "pedophile" — one of two times he did so, according to NJ.com. According to Nexis, however, Durr's online history got no media coverage when he ran unsuccessfully for a state Assembly seat in 2017 nor when he ran and lost again two years later.

Political observers in New Jersey say the inattention this time around partially reflected low expectations for Durr's candidacy against Sweeney, a six-time incumbent who is president of the state Senate. "This race wasn't just off the media's radar, it was off everyone's radar," said Brigid Harrison, a professor of political science and law at Montclair State. "No one even considered that [Durr] was a real threat, and that includes me."

But the lack of media scrutiny may tell a larger tale about the state of local news reporting.

Years of cutbacks and consolidation among news organizations have left many communities without vigorous local coverage. Hundreds of newspapers have folded during the past two decades amid technological and economic turmoil — mostly small weeklies that focused on local issues. They have left behind "ghost" newspapers that try to report on broad territories with hollowed-out staffs or news deserts where there is no local reporting at all.

The southern New Jersey region once had four daily newspapers. But in 2012, Advance Publications merged three that it owned — the Gloucester County Times, Today's Sunbeam in Salem County and the News of Cumberland County — into a single paper, the South Jersey Times. Salem, Gloucester and Cumberland counties form the heart of the district won by Durr.

The Times's major competitors include the Courier Post in Cherry Hill and its sister paper, the Daily Journal in Vineland, both owned by Gannett Co., the nation's largest newspaper owner and a vigorous cost cutter. The Philadelphia Inquirer is the region's leading metropolitan paper.

The reporting staffs of the surviving local newspapers "have been decimated" and "barely cover local news anymore," said David Wildstein, who runs the New Jersey Globe, a digital news site focused on state issues and politics. "It's a shame."

Collectively, the South Jersey Times, Courier Post and Daily Journal list a total of 13 news reporters on their mastheads, covering a four-county region that has a population of just over 1 million. Editors of the papers didn't reply to multiple requests for comment.

Harrison said the broader news ecosystem is similarly grim. She estimates that the number of reporters covering the New Jersey State House in Trenton has fallen by about 75 percent over the past two decades. TV stations in nearby Philadelphia and Wilmington, Del., reach parts of the third district as well, but regional TV stations rarely cover local politics, especially those in a nearby state.

The nonreporting is a "sad illustration" of a larger crisis in the news media, said Tim Franklin, the former editor of the Baltimore Sun and Orlando Sentinel who now heads a local-news initiative at Northwestern University's Medill School of Journalism.

"The voters in South Jersey's 3rd Legislative District should have known about Durr's posts long before Election Day," Franklin said. "Local news and information is the oxygen of a functioning, self-governed democracy. And our system is choking from expanding news deserts and ghost newspapers. . . . We have many fewer journalists covering the very state officials who have a profound effect on people's everyday lives."

Some of the nonreporting might arguably be laid at Sweeney's feet, suggests Wildstein. Reporters often rely on leaks of damaging information about a candidate supplied by an opponent. But in this instance, it's unclear whether Sweeney's campaign possessed such "opposition research" or tried to disseminate it during the campaign. (Sweeney's representatives did not respond to requests for comment.)

For his part, Durr tacitly admitted his social media posts could have proved an embarrassment during the campaign. After his comments were reported last week, he deleted his Twitter account and released a statement. "I'm a passionate guy and I sometimes say things in the heat of the moment," he said. "If I said things in the past that hurt anybody's feelings, I sincerely apologize."

He added, "I support everybody's right to worship in any manner they choose and to worship the God of their choice. I support all people and I support everybody's rights. That's what I am here to do, work for the people and support their rights."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on November 11, 2021, 09:45:26 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 04, 2021, 05:00:17 PM
I wish I saw a path to having anyone other than Trump in the White House in Jan 2025. Maybe my brain's just weary of it all.
I understand the feeling.  You're not alone.

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on November 11, 2021, 10:31:25 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 11, 2021, 08:42:56 AM
And, the media fails the Public again:

How the media missed a New Jersey senate candidate's racist social media posts — until he'd already won.

By Paul Farhi

Yesterday at 7:00 a.m. EST

Edward Durr was such a long-shot candidate in his New Jersey state Senate race that no one seemed to notice something rather striking about him: He had a history of posting bigoted, misogynistic and derogatory comments on social media.

"Mohammed was a pedophile!" he wrote in 2019 in a tweet that also described Islam as "a false religion" and "a cult of hate." In other online posts since last year, he has called the coronavirus "the China virus," blamed an "influx of #illegalAliens" for spreading disease, used the motto of the far-right QAnon conspiracy movement and compared vaccination mandates to the Holocaust. He also denigrated Vice President Harris on Facebook, writing that she had earned her position only as a result of her race and gender.

Yet none of it rated news coverage, even after Durr, a commercial truck driver who had never held office, became the Republican nominee for New Jersey's 3rd Legislative District in April. According to a search of the Nexis database, which catalogues thousands of news sources, there were no published or broadcast reports about Durr's posts in the six months leading up to Election Day.

Durr's comments made plenty of news after last week's election, when reporters finally caught up to his social media history. But by then he had already scored a stunning upset over Democrat Steve Sweeney, one of the state's most powerful officials. Durr, 58, won the Senate seat by roughly 2,200 votes out of 65,000 cast.

One of the media's basic functions is to serve as a watchdog, particularly in scrutinizing candidates for public office. But in Durr's case, the watchdogs failed to bark for years.

His incendiary posts date back to at least 2017, when he called U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) a "pedophile" — one of two times he did so, according to NJ.com. According to Nexis, however, Durr's online history got no media coverage when he ran unsuccessfully for a state Assembly seat in 2017 nor when he ran and lost again two years later.

Political observers in New Jersey say the inattention this time around partially reflected low expectations for Durr's candidacy against Sweeney, a six-time incumbent who is president of the state Senate. "This race wasn't just off the media's radar, it was off everyone's radar," said Brigid Harrison, a professor of political science and law at Montclair State. "No one even considered that [Durr] was a real threat, and that includes me."

But the lack of media scrutiny may tell a larger tale about the state of local news reporting.

Years of cutbacks and consolidation among news organizations have left many communities without vigorous local coverage. Hundreds of newspapers have folded during the past two decades amid technological and economic turmoil — mostly small weeklies that focused on local issues. They have left behind "ghost" newspapers that try to report on broad territories with hollowed-out staffs or news deserts where there is no local reporting at all.

The southern New Jersey region once had four daily newspapers. But in 2012, Advance Publications merged three that it owned — the Gloucester County Times, Today's Sunbeam in Salem County and the News of Cumberland County — into a single paper, the South Jersey Times. Salem, Gloucester and Cumberland counties form the heart of the district won by Durr.

The Times's major competitors include the Courier Post in Cherry Hill and its sister paper, the Daily Journal in Vineland, both owned by Gannett Co., the nation's largest newspaper owner and a vigorous cost cutter. The Philadelphia Inquirer is the region's leading metropolitan paper.

The reporting staffs of the surviving local newspapers "have been decimated" and "barely cover local news anymore," said David Wildstein, who runs the New Jersey Globe, a digital news site focused on state issues and politics. "It's a shame."

Collectively, the South Jersey Times, Courier Post and Daily Journal list a total of 13 news reporters on their mastheads, covering a four-county region that has a population of just over 1 million. Editors of the papers didn't reply to multiple requests for comment.

Harrison said the broader news ecosystem is similarly grim. She estimates that the number of reporters covering the New Jersey State House in Trenton has fallen by about 75 percent over the past two decades. TV stations in nearby Philadelphia and Wilmington, Del., reach parts of the third district as well, but regional TV stations rarely cover local politics, especially those in a nearby state.

The nonreporting is a "sad illustration" of a larger crisis in the news media, said Tim Franklin, the former editor of the Baltimore Sun and Orlando Sentinel who now heads a local-news initiative at Northwestern University's Medill School of Journalism.

"The voters in South Jersey's 3rd Legislative District should have known about Durr's posts long before Election Day," Franklin said. "Local news and information is the oxygen of a functioning, self-governed democracy. And our system is choking from expanding news deserts and ghost newspapers. . . . We have many fewer journalists covering the very state officials who have a profound effect on people's everyday lives."

Some of the nonreporting might arguably be laid at Sweeney's feet, suggests Wildstein. Reporters often rely on leaks of damaging information about a candidate supplied by an opponent. But in this instance, it's unclear whether Sweeney's campaign possessed such "opposition research" or tried to disseminate it during the campaign. (Sweeney's representatives did not respond to requests for comment.)

For his part, Durr tacitly admitted his social media posts could have proved an embarrassment during the campaign. After his comments were reported last week, he deleted his Twitter account and released a statement. "I'm a passionate guy and I sometimes say things in the heat of the moment," he said. "If I said things in the past that hurt anybody's feelings, I sincerely apologize."

He added, "I support everybody's right to worship in any manner they choose and to worship the God of their choice. I support all people and I support everybody's rights. That's what I am here to do, work for the people and support their rights."

But how newsworthy is it when a GOP candidate says stuff that's now typical of GOP candidates? Other than calling Menendez a pedophile, there's nothing he said that isn't par for the GOP course.

But this makes it clear that Sweeney deserved his loss. Had he or his staff done any "due diligence" on his opponent, they would have found it and publicized it well before Election Day.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 11, 2021, 10:41:26 AM
Quote from: JBS on November 11, 2021, 10:31:25 AM
But how newsworthy is it when a GOP candidate says stuff that's now typical of GOP candidates? Other than calling Menendez a pedophile, there's nothing he said that isn't par for the GOP course.

But this makes it clear that Sweeney deserved his loss. Had he or his staff done any "due diligence" on his opponent, they would have found it and publicized it well before Election Day.

Sadly, true.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 12, 2021, 04:07:14 AM
Quote from: JBS on November 11, 2021, 10:31:25 AM
But how newsworthy is it when a GOP candidate says stuff that's now typical of GOP candidates? Other than calling Menendez a pedophile, there's nothing he said that isn't par for the GOP course.

But this makes it clear that Sweeney deserved his loss. Had he or his staff done any "due diligence" on his opponent, they would have found it and publicized it well before Election Day.
There shouldn't be anything attractive about such a candidate. It's very depressing to see how dysfunctional American society seems from this distance. It's tempting to only blame Democrats for seemingly not offering anything effectively substantial. How brain dead do we have to be to end up with such people running government?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 13, 2021, 06:20:45 AM
Trump's callous new comments on Pence reinforce what he really thought of Jan. 6


By Aaron Blake, Senior reporter
Yesterday at 10:02 a.m. EST

Donald Trump made it abundantly clear on Jan. 6 that he wasn't exactly broken up about his supporters violently storming the U.S. Capitol in an effort to overturn an American election — and indeed that he might well have approved of it.

And the evidence has only grown that the latter, specifically, is true.

A new development Friday morning is one of the most shocking to date. We knew Trump didn't show much regard for his vice president, Mike Pence, during or after rioters stormed the Capitol chanting for Pence's hanging. And it turns out Trump viewed it as part of a rational enterprise.

In an interview for his new book, ABC News's Jonathan Karl pressed Trump on the scene in a way we haven't seen yet. And Trump not only didn't denounce his supporters, he said what they were doing was "common sense."

A brief transcript:

KARL: Were you worried about him during that siege? Were you worried about his safety?

TRUMP: No, I thought he was well-protected, and I had heard that he was in good shape. No. Because I had heard he was in very good shape. But, but, no, I think —

KARL: Because you heard those chants. That was terrible. I mean —

TRUMP: He could have — well, the people were very angry.
KARL: They were saying, "Hang Mike Pence."
TRUMP: Because — it's common sense, Jon. It's common sense that you're supposed to protect. How can you — if you know a vote is fraudulent, right — how can you pass on a fraudulent vote to Congress? How can you do that? And I'm telling you: 50/50, it's right down the middle for the top constitutional scholars when I speak to them. Anybody I spoke to — almost all of them at least pretty much agree, and some very much agree with me — because he's passing on a vote that he knows is fraudulent. How can you pass a vote that you know is fraudulent?

While the way Trump spoke about this is remarkably callous, it jibes with plenty we already knew about the situation. The Washington Post's Josh Dawsey and Ashley Parker reported that Trump didn't call Pence for days afterward, for instance, despite the danger his VP faced.

It's also become evident that the effort to lean on Pence didn't go away after the riot began. Reporting has indicated Trump was still pushing for Congress to overturn the election even after the riot. And a Post investigation last month revealed that, when Pence went into hiding, Trump lawyer John Eastman told a Pence aide that he blamed Pence for the riot, given Pence had declined to help overturn the election using his historically ceremonial role. Afterward, Eastman tried to use the fallout from the riot to get Pence to throw the process into question based upon a technicality involving timing.

It all fills out a picture that seemed rather obvious in real time but, thanks to Trump's often unclear and mostly suggestive comments, allowed his allies to suggest perhaps it wasn't all it seemed.

To wit:

Trump tweeted attacking Pence even after the riot had begun.
Trump's response to the Capitol riot was slow — slow enough that House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) floated Congress censuring him for it. And when Trump did urge peacefulness, he often layered it with sympathy for those who stormed the Capitol — i.e. "Go home with love & in peace. Remember this day forever!" and "Go home. We love you."
Trump tweeted the evening of Jan. 6, "These are the things and events that happen when a sacred landslide election victory is so unceremoniously & viciously stripped away from great patriots who have been badly & unfairly treated for so long."
Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) has stated that Trump was "walking around the White House confused about why other people on his team weren't as excited as he was."
Of the calls we know Trump made to lawmakers during the riot, they generally went to those who agreed with his effort to challenge the election results, including Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) and Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.).
Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler (R-Wash.) submitted evidence during Trump's impeachment that Trump told McCarthy during the riot: "Well, Kevin, I guess these people are more upset about the election than you are."

That last one is key. It landed late in Trump's impeachment trial, during which Democrats called no new witnesses and didn't dwell upon new evidence beyond never-before-seen videos of the riot.

The impeachment trial was about Trump's alleged incitement of the rioters — not so much what he did after it began. But this spoke to a separate but very related issue: the idea that he relished the scenes of his supporters violently trying to overturn an American election or, at the very least, felt it was justified. If you don't approve of that or at least see value in it, you don't say such things. But Trump said them — repeatedly, including long afterward.

Even many Republicans who voted against Trump's impeachment or his conviction acknowledged that what Trump did was bad. They disagreed about whether it was impeachable, including by citing the legal standard for incitement and the fact that Trump was no longer in office. But since then, the party has largely moved on and suggested this isn't worth looking into that hard — evolving more and more toward a giant shrug at the situation.

Yet here is the person who could very well lead their party into the 2024 elections stating after the fact that a historic insurrection based upon his own false claims of election fraud that resulted in multiple deaths was, to some extent, "common sense." And it should now be much more difficult for his party to turn a blind eye to that or dismiss the idea that such things could happen again.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 13, 2021, 06:22:23 AM
When Blake writes, And it should now be much more difficult for his party to turn a blind eye to that or dismiss the idea that such things could happen again, I fear he is too sanguine. The sycophantic GQP enablers are highly practiced in turning blind eyes.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on November 13, 2021, 01:49:49 PM
The Atlantic: the story of the guy who was promoted from being Trump's Coke-bringer to head of government personell:

THE MAN WHO MADE JANUARY 6 POSSIBLE
The story of Johnny McEntee—the "deputy president" who rose to power at precisely the moment when democracy was falling apart (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/11/trump-johnny-mcentee-january-6-betrayal/620646/)

[...]"I want to put Johnny in charge of personnel," the president told Mulvaney.

The director of presidential personnel is responsible for vetting and hiring everybody, including ambassadors, Cabinet secretaries, and top intelligence officials. McEntee had never hired anybody for anything. Now he was going to be in charge of perhaps the most important human-resources department in the world?

Mulvaney called his top deputy, Emma Doyle, who oversaw the current director of personnel, into the meeting. "Mr. President," she said, "I have never said no to anything you've asked me to do, but I am asking you to please reconsider this. I don't think it is a good idea."

Doyle had spent a lot of time around the president, but she had never seen him as angry as he was about to become.

"You people never fucking listen to me!" Trump screamed. "You're going to fucking do what I tell you to do."

A few hours later, Doyle was on Air Force One, along with McEntee, en route to a Trump rally in New Hampshire. She asked him about his interest in the position.

"People have been telling me I should do that for a long time," McEntee told her. "I didn't feel ready before, but I am 29 now and I'm ready." He added, "I'm the only person around here that's just here for the president." [...]


I'd head parts of this story elsewhere, but this bit was new:

"McEntee's underlings were, for the most part, comically inexperienced. He had staffed his office with very young Trump activists. He had hired his friends, and he had hired young women—as one senior official in the West Wing put it to me, "the most beautiful 21-year-old girls you could find, and guys who would be absolutely no threat to Johnny in going after those girls."

"It was the Rockettes and the Dungeons & Dragons group," the official said.

In fact, one McEntee hire was literally a Rockette; she had performed with Radio City Music Hall's finest in the 2019 Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade. The only work experience listed on her résumé besides a White House internship was a stint as a dance instructor. McEntee also hired Instagram influencers. Camryn Kinsey, for example, was 20 and still in college when McEntee gave her the title of external-relations director. In an interview with the online publication The Conservateur, she said, "Only in Trump's America could I go from working in a gym to working in the White House, because that's the American dream." (Kinsey went on to work at the pro-Trump One American News Network.)

that last line again: "Only in Trump's America could I go from working in a gym to working in the White House.:

the latest episode of The New Abnormal podcast also has a fun interview with the author of that article, Jonathan Karl
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Christabel on November 13, 2021, 02:13:26 PM
You all need to stop obsessing about Trump and being fearful of him.  I thought the Left wasn't the fearful cohort, but it happens that you all are. Terribly fearful.

Perfect antidote;  make lots of money and spend time counting cash.  Something tells me the vast majority of you haven't got any;  ergo your political leanings.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on November 13, 2021, 02:29:30 PM
Quote from: Christabel on November 13, 2021, 02:13:26 PM
You all need to stop obsessing about Trump and being fearful of him.  I thought the Left wasn't the fearful cohort, but it happens that you all are. Terribly fearful.

Perfect antidote;  make lots of money and spend time counting cash.  Something tells me the vast majority of you haven't got any;  ergo your political leanings.

So much nonsense in such a short post.

I thought struggling "economic anxiety" was believed the reason people voted for Trump rather than Biden or Sanders? I personally don't believe that - I think its all about the circus..

And making and counting money is the shallowest "goal" of life, so suggest something better.

As for the possibility of a second Trump term: as David Frum recently put it: the velociraptors have learned how to turn the doorknobs now.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on November 13, 2021, 04:44:54 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on November 13, 2021, 02:29:30 PM
And making and counting money is the shallowest "goal" of life, so suggest something better.
The people who work nonstop to make money and have no hobbies are quite weird, aren't they?
But money is also super important, making enough of it is the one thing that prevented a lifetime of hopelessness and meaninglessness, and inability to do anything, for me. So it can't be underestimated, at least as a stairway to live meaningfully.


Quote from: Christabel on November 13, 2021, 02:13:26 PM
Perfect antidote;  make lots of money and spend time counting cash.  Something tells me the vast majority of you haven't got any;  ergo your political leanings.
I'd suspect more of a dependent mentality for people that are super economically left, usually. Money can come and go due to uncontrollable circumstances, usually political stances are less volatile. I could be wrong, idk, what do you think?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 15, 2021, 03:57:17 AM
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/15/us/politics/republicans-2022-redistricting-maps.html

Republicans Gain Heavy House Edge in 2022 as Gerrymandered Maps Emerge
On a highly distorted congressional map that is still taking shape, the party has added enough safe House districts to capture control of the chamber based on its redistricting edge alone.


Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 15, 2021, 03:58:45 AM
Quote from: T. D. on November 15, 2021, 03:57:17 AM
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/15/us/politics/republicans-2022-redistricting-maps.html

Republicans Gain Heavy House Edge in 2022 as Gerrymandered Maps Emerge
On a highly distorted congressional map that is still taking shape, the party has added enough safe House districts to capture control of the chamber based on its redistricting edge alone.




That, alas, was expected. and one wonders where the Democrats have been while the "fix" was being applied.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on November 15, 2021, 07:09:12 AM
Quote from: T. D. on November 15, 2021, 03:57:17 AM
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/15/us/politics/republicans-2022-redistricting-maps.html

Republicans Gain Heavy House Edge in 2022 as Gerrymandered Maps Emerge
On a highly distorted congressional map that is still taking shape, the party has added enough safe House districts to capture control of the chamber based on its redistricting edge alone.

The USA is verging on "managed democracy", (sometimes called "guided democracy").  Urban and minority populations are now underclasses whose wishes are systematically thwarted.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on November 15, 2021, 11:00:56 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 15, 2021, 03:58:45 AM
That, alas, was expected. and one wonders where the Democrats have been while the "fix" was being applied.

Not to put too fine a point on it, when you are the minority party in most state legislatures, you can basically eat shit. Here in TX we fought against it in every possible way, but it happened anyway. The only upside is that in the new 'district', Louis F. Gohmert isn't my rep any longer. Life is good! :-\

8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 15, 2021, 12:31:12 PM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on November 15, 2021, 11:00:56 AM
Not to put too fine a point on it, when you are the minority party in most state legislatures, you can basically eat shit. Here in TX we fought against it in every possible way, but it happened anyway. The only upside is that in the new 'district', Louis F. Gohmert isn't my rep any longer. Life is good! :-\

8)

Ugh, mostly.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 16, 2021, 04:33:20 PM
Of course, the real catastrophe is that it keeps the very democracy in peril

Opinion: The Democratic Party's progressive wing is on a kamikaze mission


By Marc A. Thiessen Columnist
Today at 2:22 p.m. EST

The news for President Biden keeps getting worse. His approval has fallen to 38 percent among registered voters, according to a new Post-ABC News poll — nearly matching President Donald Trump's all-time low in the RealClearPolitics average. But unlike Trump, Biden began his presidency with almost 56 percent approval. No recent president has fallen from grace so far, so fast, so early in his presidency.

However, two findings in the Post poll stand out: Fifty-three percent of voters say Biden is not keeping his major campaign promises; and 62 percent are concerned Biden will do too much to increase the size and role of government in U.S. society.

They are right. As a candidate, Biden promised unity, moderation and bipartisanship. Instead, he was quickly captured by his party's progressive wing, which convinced him that he should be a transformational president. But voters didn't put him in office to be a transformational president. As Virginia Rep. Abigail Spanberger (D) explained after Republicans turned her blue state red, "Nobody elected him to be FDR. They elected him to be normal and stop the chaos."

Even the New York Times [emphasis mine — kh] is warning Democrats they are veering too far to the left and must "return to the moderate policies and values that fueled the blue-wave victories in 2018 and won Joe Biden the presidency in 2020." Failure to do so, the Times cautioned, could lead to wipeouts of historic proportions in 2022 and 2024.

But while the Times and moderate Democrats might care about winning elections, progressives in Congress don't. They know they don't have a popular mandate for socialism — if voters wanted Biden to be FDR, they would have given him FDR-like majorities. Progressives know they have been given a brief window while Democrats have unified control of government to enact as much of their radical agenda as possible. Thanks to the Virginia election and Biden's collapsing numbers, they know that window is closing fast.

They also understand that government is a one-way ratchet — and that once a new entitlement program is created, it almost never gets dismantled. Just look at Obamacare. Early in his first term, President Barack Obama rammed Obamacare through Congress, even though it was deeply unpopular. Result? Though Obama was reelected, on his watch Democrats suffered the largest loss in power of any party since Dwight D. Eisenhower — a net loss of 12 Senate seats, 64 House seats, 13 governorships and 816 state legislative seats. And those defeats paved the way for Trump's presidency.

But a decade later, despite unified control of government and the appointment of three Supreme Court justices, Republicans have failed to repeal Obamacare or persuade the courts to strike it down. Now, Democrats are back in power — and Obamacare is still here.

The lesson for progressives is clear: When you have power, use it. Don't compromise. Don't moderate. Seize the moment to expand the size and scope of government as much as you possibly can. It might cost you power temporarily, but Republicans won't be able to reverse the progress you make. And when you get power back — as you inevitably will — you can pick up where you left off and continue the long march toward socialism.

In other words, the Democratic Party's progressive wing is on a kamikaze mission. Does Biden really want to go along for the ride? There is an alternative — the model that Sens. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) and Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.) forged with their bipartisan infrastructure bill, which Biden signed into law on Monday.

At that signing ceremony, Biden basked in the bipartisan glow and said "the bill I'm about to sign into law is proof that despite the cynics, Democrats and Republicans can come together and deliver results." But Biden could have held that ceremony months earlier when he still enjoyed majority support — if he had not given his blessing to progressives to take the infrastructure bill hostage as leverage to pass a separate, Democrats-only multitrillion-dollar social spending monstrosity. Indeed, he could have had multiple ceremonies by now — to sign bipartisan police reform legislation into law, and bipartisan China legislation the Senate passed in June, but which has languished in the Democratic-controlled House.

Instead, the president cast his lot with the radical wing of his party, which sees him not as their leader but only as a means to their socialist end. That's why his approval is nearly at a Trumpian low, most Americans think he is incompetent, and he is about to face a historic drubbing at the polls next year.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on November 16, 2021, 06:06:48 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 16, 2021, 04:33:20 PM
In other words, the Democratic Party's progressive wing is on a kamikaze mission. Does Biden really want to go along for the ride? There is an alternative — the model that Sens. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) and Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.) forged

Why are you wasting my time with this garbage?  Usually you paste in much better stuff, Karl.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 16, 2021, 06:12:18 PM
Quote from: Daverz on November 16, 2021, 06:06:48 PM
Why are you wasting my time with this garbage?  Usually you paste in much better stuff, Karl.

I agree that his take on Sinema & Manchin is way off.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 17, 2021, 03:34:33 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on November 15, 2021, 07:09:12 AM
Urban and minority populations are now underclasses whose wishes are systematically thwarted.
This is a losing political message. I fear for where this leads (the return of trump). Democrats need to give up on this identity oppression obsession and craft policies for all working people who are all affected by long-term trends. There's a grand strategy that would guarantee Democratic victory: Vow to close the borders (and mean it) and reduce immigration temporarily, give up pushing amnesty in the near term, veer away from identity politics and woke culture that aims to deconstruct everybody (emphasize fairness, harmony, equality - not equity, and reformed but strong policing), promise no more nation-building while taking a strong line against China, focus on decent wages, healthcare, reducing costs for higher education and promoting trade schools and community colleges. Keep environmentalism though it's a tough sell (have some conviction).   
This is a winning strategy. Biden should probably not run again. Democrats must dump Harris and look for a mainstream, but not corporate, candidate. Maybe a Dem from a red state (but not WV or Arizona please. Make it a governor maybe).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 17, 2021, 09:25:54 AM
The narrow nature of the self-defense inquiry is one reason people can escape responsibility for killings that are deeply wrongful in every moral sense. Take, for instance, cases in which bad cops create danger and confusion through incompetence or excessive aggression, and then they respond to the danger or confusion they created by using deadly force.

Kyle Rittenhouse Is No Hero (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/11/kyle-rittenhouse-right-self-defense-role-model/620715/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 17, 2021, 09:47:59 AM
The U.S. drug epidemic reached another terrible milestone Wednesday when the government announced that more than 100,000 people had died of overdoses between April 2020 and April 2021. It is the first time that drug-related deaths have reached six figures in any 12-month period.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 17, 2021, 09:58:37 AM
'QAnon shaman' sentenced to 41 months for role in Capitol riot

By Tom Jackman

Today at 12:07 p.m. EST

Jacob Chansley, whose brightly painted face, tattooed torso and horned cap became a visual icon of the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, was sentenced Wednesday to 41 months in prison by a federal judge in Washington. His lawyer had asked the judge to impose a sentence of time already served, basically the entire 10 months since the insurrection, during which Chansley attracted more attention for demanding an organic diet while in jail and giving an interview to "60 Minutes."

The sentence of roughly 3 ½ years is equal to the longest yet handed down to a Capitol rioter. Of the roughly 130 people who have pleaded guilty so far, only 16 have admitted to felonies, and Chansley is the fourth felon to be sentenced. The other three received terms of eight, 14 and last week a man who punched a Capitol police officer also received 41 months.

Chansley, 34, was photographed parading shirtless through the halls of the Capitol with a six-foot spear, howling through a bullhorn and then sitting in the vice president's chair in the Senate. He became known as the "QAnon Shaman" because of his appearances at gatherings of the "QAnon" conspiracy theorists and his Shamanic religious beliefs.

Prosecutors quoted Chansley offering a prayer while sitting at the dais of the Senate, thanking God for "filling this chamber with patriots that love you. ... Thank you for allowing us to get rid of the communists, the globalists, and the traitors within our government."

Chansley's "now-famous criminal acts made him the public face of the Capitol riot," prosecutors wrote in a sentencing memo. With a suggested sentencing range of 41 to 51 months, the government asked for the maximum 51 months.

Chansley's lawyer, Albert S. Watkins, argued that his client had been sufficiently penalized by his 10 months in jail.

"Mr. Chansley is in dire need of mental health treatment," Watkins wrote in his sentencing memo. He said that a psychological evaluation earlier this year found that Chansley suffered from schizotypal personality disorder, anxiety and depression.

Watkins asked U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth to go below the sentencing guidelines range and release his client, due in part to Chansley's "mental health infirmities of significance."

Chansley spoke to the judge for about 30 minutes, repeatedly invoking his spiritual guides of Jesus Christ and Mohandas Gandhi. "Gandhi would allow his loyalty to God and truth to guide him to accepting responsibility," Chansley said. "I was wrong for entering the Capitol. I have no excuse. No excuse whatsoever. My behavior was indefensible."

Chansley's lengthy comments, in which he praised Lamberth's military service as a lawyer in the judge advocate corps, seemed to convince the judge that he had made significant changes. "I think your remarks are the most remarkable that I've heard in 34 years" as a judge, Lamberth said. "I think you are genuine in your remorse. Parts of those remarks are akin to the kinds of things that Martin Luther King would have said."

But Lamberth said he could not reduce Chansley's sentence below the recommended guidelines because "What you did here was horrific," the judge said, "as you now concede. And obstructing the government as you did is the type of conduct that is so serious that I cannot justify a downward departure. I do think the minimum end of the guidelines is what you've earned because you've done everything right from the time that you started, and you've certainly done everything good today, convinced the court that you're a new person."

Chansley, who lives in Phoenix, had developed a following on various social media platforms in the months before Jan. 6, and posted messages such as, "We shall have no real hope to survive the enemies arrayed against us until we hang the traitors lurking among us," prosecutors said.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Kimberly L. Paschall noted that Chansley and Watkins had frequently claimed that his protests were peaceful. Reading from his social media posts, Paschall said: "That is not peaceful. It's a call to battle."

Chansley drove from Phoenix to Washington and was first spotted outside the Capitol at 1:50 p.m. on Jan. 6, according to court records. There was ample photo and video documentation of Chansley's movements, wearing a fur vest, carrying an American flag tied to a pole with a spear at the tip, and using a bullhorn. Paschall played some of it for Lamberth on Wednesday. Prosecutors said Chansley was among the first rioters inside the Capitol on Jan. 6. He also was the first one indicted.

Chansley used his bullhorn "to rile up the crowd and demand that lawmakers be brought out," prosecutors said. At 2:52 p.m., he entered the Senate gallery and began screaming obscenities, one of the videos showed.

He then gained access to the Senate floor, took the seat that Vice President Mike Pence had recently vacated, took pictures of himself and declared that Pence was a traitor. "It's only a matter of time. Justice is coming!" Chansley wrote on a paper on the dais, prosecutors said.

"What he wrote there," Lamberth said, "is a big problem."

Chansley was inside the Capitol for more than an hour, prosecutors said. He then drove back to Phoenix and gave an interview to NBC News in which he said, "The fact that we had a bunch of our traitors in office hunker down, put on their gas masks and retreat into their underground bunker, I consider that a win." When he learned that the FBI was looking for him, he called the bureau and told them he was glad he sat in Pence's chair, and called him "a child-trafficking traitor."

While in jail, Chansley spoke to "60 Minutes+" and told them he was allowed into the Capitol by the police, and that he was merely intending "to bring divinity, to bring God back into the Senate."

Chansley pleaded guilty in September to one count of obstruction of an official proceeding, namely the counting of the electoral votes in the presidential election. The charge has a maximum 20-year prison sentence, but Chansley had no prior criminal history and was not accused of committing any violence on Jan. 6.

In arguing for a 51-month sentence, Paschall wrote in her sentencing memo that "the peaceful transition of power in our nation was disrupted by a mob of thousands. ... And this defendant was, quite literally, their flag-bearer."

Paschall told the judge Wednesday that "deterrence weighed heavily in the government's recommendations here." She said prosecutors wanted to send the message, "Don't think the justice system will sit idly by while you attempt to interrupt the peaceful transfer of power."

Watkins argued that "general deterrence does not justify a sentence in excess of time served."

He cited cases in his memo in which judges imposed sentences below the recommended guidelines because of the defendant's health conditions.

He noted that while Chansley was on active duty in the Navy, a psychological evaluation was done in 2006 which diagnosed him with "mental health infirmities," but that was never revealed to Chansley. On Jan. 6, his actions, appearance and Shamanic chants "were obvious indicia of mental health vulnerabilities," Watkins wrote.

"He made himself the image of the riot," Lambert told Watkins on Wednesday.

Watkins agreed.

"Jake is a horrific image indeed," Watkins said. "This assault on democracy was repugnant."

Lamberth also issued the other 41-month sentence in the Jan. 6 cases, to Scott Kevin Fairlamb for assault on a police officer.

"You didn't slug anybody," the judge told Chansley, "but what you did here was actually obstruct the functioning of the whole government."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 17, 2021, 10:12:10 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 17, 2021, 09:58:37 AM
He noted that while Chansley was on active duty in the Navy, a psychological evaluation was done in 2006 which diagnosed him with "mental health infirmities," but that was never revealed to Chansley. On Jan. 6, his actions, appearance and Shamanic chants "were obvious indicia of mental health vulnerabilities," Watkins wrote.

Increasingly I'm getting the feeling that there are a lot of mental health issues in this political radicalism, fanned by the internet, that plays into people's fears, anxieties and anger.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 17, 2021, 10:13:57 AM
Quote from: Herman on November 17, 2021, 10:12:10 AM
Increasingly I'm getting the feeling that there are a lot of mental health issues in this political radicalism, fanned by the internet, that plays into people's fears, anxieties and anger.

Yes.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on November 17, 2021, 11:29:19 AM
Quote from: Herman on November 17, 2021, 10:12:10 AM
Increasingly I'm getting the feeling that there are a lot of mental health issues in this political radicalism, fanned by the internet, that plays into people's fears, anxieties and anger.

Quite possible, but I'm inclined not to read overly much into a statement made by a defense attorney (who will of course claim anything). Interesting question is why so many presumably sane/intelligent people buy into the utterances of obvious wingnuts.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: André on November 17, 2021, 11:43:58 AM
Quote from: T. D. on November 17, 2021, 11:29:19 AM
Quite possible, but I'm inclined not to read overly much into a statement made by a defense attorney (who will of course claim anything). Interesting question is why so many presumably sane/intelligent people buy into the utterances of obvious wingnuts.

It could be that these people are not quite sane, having their own mental problems rooted in a sense of alienation. For decades and decades an idealized picture of America as a land of opportunities, justice and power has been ingrained through school, TV, politicians etc. They have trouble adjusting to the reality of a fast-changing, money-obsessed society that is anything but fair.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on November 17, 2021, 02:15:46 PM
I do not know what to think anymore.

The right claims that the election was stolen.

The left is claiming that Republicans are trying to destroy our democracy.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on November 17, 2021, 02:31:55 PM
The second one.

Consider the sources.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: amw on November 17, 2021, 08:28:31 PM
The left is largely staying out of this considering that we never believed the USA was a "democracy" in the first place, and have no interest in "redeeming" it or whatever, only in seeing it be destroyed by whatever means possible.

From this perspective, it is obvious that Democrats and Republicans are collaborating; neither party wishes to actually govern in any meaningful sense. Normally any official governance can be avoided because government will be divided in some sense (one party will control some institutions and the other will control others, etc), allowing everything to be handled via corporate policy, local police departments, and of course the military. At the moment the Democrats accidentally seized control of both the executive and legislature, so they are having to rely on one or two designated villains (Manchin, Sinema, etc.) to prevent them from taking any action, while they wait for Republicans to gain back the legislature in 2022—a goal they entirely support and are working towards.

The purpose of both parties is not to pass laws (all the freshman Republican state legislators elected over the last decade have found this out to their peril—they pass laws which instantly prove unpopular, are struck down in court, and lead to phenomena such as Kentucky, Kansas and Louisiana electing Democratic governors), or even to win elections; it is to serve as lifelong sinecures for political science graduates who, if they are successful enough at fundraising and have few enough principles, may eventually be rewarded with a safe seat in the House/Senate in perpetuity—and for those who lose elections, lucrative lobbying careers, again in perpetuity. As for the politics, it's almost entirely aesthetics: the parties invent concepts such as Critical Race Theory or Russian Interference In Our Elections, attribute them to the opposite party, and people vote accordingly.

That's the left take on things in any case. People on the centre-left and centre-right do have various beliefs about the possibilities of engaging within the electoral system but these are largely unsupported by reality.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on November 18, 2021, 07:01:20 AM
Quote from: amw on November 17, 2021, 08:28:31 PM
The left is largely staying out of this considering that we never believed the USA was a "democracy" in the first place, and have no interest in "redeeming" it or whatever, only in seeing it be destroyed by whatever means possible.
...

I've been listening to "We're a republic, not a democracy" BS from Americans for decades.  But the question whether the USA is democratic, not whether it's a democracy vs. republic.

To simplify just a little, the USA is neither a democracy nor democratic, at least not at the Federal level.

At the inception of the nation, the states saw the Federal government as their "creature";  they intended to keep it that way and have largely succeeded.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 18, 2021, 10:28:36 AM
In Charlottesville trial, jurors learn to decode the secret slang of white supremacists

By Ellie Silverman

Today at 6:00 a.m. EST

CHARLOTTESVILLE — The jury in a federal courtroom listened as a longtime researcher of far-right movements parsed the style guide of the infamous neo-Nazi website, the Daily Stormer.

"The tone of the site should be light. Most people are not comfortable with material that comes across as vitriolic, raging, nonironic hatred. The unindoctrinated should not be able to tell if we are joking or not," according to a guide section titled "Lulz" — an acronym for laugh out loud. Continuing with a derogatory term for Jews, it read, "This is obviously a ploy and I actually do want to gas k---s. But that's neither here nor there."

This evidence, introduced in an ongoing civil trial against organizers of the deadly 2017 Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, appeared to highlight a sinister strategy expert witness Pete Simi was trying to teach the jurors: the ways in which white supremacists employ humor to shield their calls for violence, in an effort to render them legally ambiguous.

As jurors consider the plaintiffs' accusation that the rally organizers conspired to foment racial violence, they have been presented with a trove of evidence that includes messages laced with slurs, memes of using cars to run over protesters and calls for cracking skulls. Over the past four weeks, plaintiffs' attorneys have tried to make their case by carefully breaking down the jokes and catch-phrases favored by far-right extremists, in an effort to teach jurors how to decode white supremacists' secret vocabulary of hate.

Whether the jury takes this evidence literally or views it as exaggeration is the crux of many arguments in this trial.

The plaintiffs' attorneys have called in experts to help the jury understand what is sinister about the numbers 1488 — which refer to "14 words," a popular white supremacist slogan, and "Heil Hitler," because "H" is the eighth letter of the alphabet. They have translated the phrase "RaHoWa," which may sound like gibberish to outsiders but among hate groups stands for "racial holy war." And they explained how a question that seems innocuous — "Did you see Kyle? — is actually a play-on-words for the Nazi salute "Sieg Heil."

White supremacist movements use "lots of insider language and codes and specific references that would require kind of an insider's knowledge," Simi said in the courtroom. "They can talk about violence, they can advocate for violence, and then say, 'Well, it was just a joke.'"

Deborah Lipstadt, a renowned Holocaust scholar, testified about the ways antisemitism is a bedrock of white supremacist ideology and one that was featured during the Unite the Right rally weekend, notably at the Friday-night torch march where a mob chanted "Jews will not replace us!"

She said the ideology behind these chants come from the "Great Replacement Theory," the conspiratorial idea of an engineered demographic replacement of White Christians that is frequently repeated by right-wing pundits such as Fox News's Tucker Carlson. In her testimony, Lipstadt called the chants at the torch march "a call to battle."

Heidi Beirich — a co-founder of the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism and former director of intelligence at the Southern Poverty Law Center — said the subculture of extremism on display in this trial illustrates how the brazen racism seen on the streets of Charlottesville four years ago emboldened and radicalized racists across the country, including those who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6.

"It shows you how much the online world has pervaded the offline world," Beirich, who has been following the trial, said in an interview with The Post. "The fact is, I wish more Americans knew what the jurors are hearing right now."

Attorneys for the plaintiffs — nine people who allege physical harm and emotional distress that weekend — and defendants are expected to begin their closing arguments Thursday.

The lawsuit backed by Integrity First for America, a civil-rights nonprofit organization, is underpinned by a more-than-150-year-old statute designed to protect newly emancipated Black people from the Ku Klux Klan.

Throughout this trial, defendants have argued they were exercising their First Amendment rights in Charlottesville. Inside the courtroom, they have used the n-word, repeated slurs for Jewish people and openly praised Adolf Hitler.

And they have dismissed calls for violence as hyperbolic jokes. Jason Kessler, a defendant and lead organizer of the Unite the Right rally, testified that many of the messages presented in court were simply "s--tposting," or posting something provocative to get a rise out of someone. Defendants blamed the mayhem of that weekend on counterprotesters they labeled "antifa," or anti-fascists, and police inaction.

Experts and attorneys for the plaintiffs say this deflection is part of a playbook to avoid accountability.

"Plausible deniability, just like mace and shields and flag poles, was a tool of this conspiracy," plaintiffs' attorney Karen Dunn said in court. "Plausible deniability is when you set up a situation in such a way that you can claim later that you had nothing to do with it."

Violence cloaked in humor

In the courtroom, plaintiffs' attorneys played a podcast recording with the voice of defendant Christopher Cantwell, who became widely known as the "crying Nazi" following an emotional video posted when a warrant was issued for his arrest.

It was an episode from Aug. 7, 2017, days before Cantwell joined hundreds of white supremacists in Charlottesville for a rally that turned deadly when a neo-Nazi sped his car into a crowd of counterprotesters, killing 32-year-old Heather Heyer. James A. Fields Jr., who was sentenced to life in prison for the car-ramming, is also a defendant in this civil suit.

"I'm not even a Hitler-ite, but I'm like 'Okay, let's f-----g gas the k---s and have a race war,'" Cantwell said. He then laughed.

"Can you explain, professor, what's going on in that clip?" plaintiffs' attorney Roberta Kaplan asked Simi.

Simi pointed to the eerie juxtaposition of Cantwell's laughter after his call for mass murder: "I can't tell you how many times over the last 25 years I've seen similar instances where violent references, violent rhetoric is ... cloaked with some reference to humor."

Cantwell has pleaded guilty in a separate case to two counts of assault and battery stemming from his use of pepper spray during the Unite the Right rally weekend. He is also serving a 41-month federal prison sentence after being convicted of extortion and threat charges.

Samantha Froelich, whose testimony was played in a deposition video by the plaintiffs' attorneys, joined the far-right group Identity Evropa for about a year to appease her boyfriend. She explained how during that time, she often saw extreme concepts disguised as jokes to make them more palatable — and as a way to have plausible deniability.

"They'll say that it's just edgy humor, but it's really just a way to push the envelope and say as heinous of things or as extreme ideas as they can and get away with it," Froelich said. "If someone were to call you out on it and say, 'Hey, that's really disgusting ideology,' you could say, 'It's just a joke. We don't mean it.'"

'Wolves in sheep's clothing'

The jurors have seen two versions of Richard Spencer in court — the white supremacist spewing a racist tirade after the Unite the Right rally in a secretly recorded audio clip and the suit-and-tie-wearing defendant who claims his beliefs are simply "controversial."

"What they say and do privately behind closed doors is going to tell us a lot about their true motives and plans in this case," Dunn, one of the plaintiffs' attorneys, told the jurors.

Simi and fellow sociologist Kathleen Blee worked with the plaintiffs to review defendants' messages and concluded they utilized a common white supremacist movement tactic, including this "front stage" and "backstage" behavior, "doublespeak" and a "new-age communication platform."

The Unite the Right rally organizers' and attendees' planning messages presented in court come from a leaked trove from the group-chat platform Discord and other communications.

During his testimony, Simi read an email between Kessler and Jeff Schoep, the former leader of the National Socialist Movement, which at one time was the largest neo-Nazi group in the country

"The number one thing that you guys can do is show up in plain clothes without flags or 'white supremacist' symbols ready to participate in and protect our event. There will be a thousand or more antifa and s--tlibs eager to start violence."

Schoep replied: "So just keep in mind that we have ceased use of the swastika as of November 2016 so you will see swastikas in some of the videos which were filmed below before."

Simi said this was a straightforward example of that "front stage, backstage" behavior: The National Socialist Movement did not stop using a swastika as their symbol because they disavowed it, Simi testified, but because of the optics.

Defendants and their followers also spoke about ways to instigate fights with their enemies in Charlottesville in a way that would allow them to claim self-defense, according to evidence presented by the plaintiffs' attorneys.

Froelich also testified to this, explaining how during her time with Identity Evropa, optics "were paramount."

Her boyfriend, who worked at an exterminator company, shared with her how he wished he was killing Jewish people instead of cockroaches.

In public, Identity Evropa members had strict instructions to "speak with eloquence" and avoid racial slurs and Nazi references, Froelich testified in a deposition.

She was told to wear dresses, look feminine and avoid unnatural hair colors.

"They wanted to be presentable," Froelich said. "It was like being wolves in sheep's clothing."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 18, 2021, 12:01:02 PM
Quote from: André on November 17, 2021, 11:43:58 AM
It could be that these people are not quite sane, having their own mental problems rooted in a sense of alienation. For decades and decades an idealized picture of America as a land of opportunities, justice and power has been ingrained through school, TV, politicians etc. They have trouble adjusting to the reality of a fast-changing, money-obsessed society that is anything but fair.

Indeed. At the root of all this anger and anxiety is this disappointment that life is just not that great all the time. It's one of the reasons why there are so few teenagers and adolescents among the angry mobs. Usually very young people are easily mobilized. However, young people have yet to experience the midlife crisis that's feeding these protests.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 18, 2021, 12:05:47 PM
Quote from: Herman on November 18, 2021, 12:01:02 PM
Indeed. At the root of all this anger and anxiety is this disappointment that life is just not that great all the time.

Grow up, for Mercy's sake!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on November 19, 2021, 03:56:00 AM
Quote from: Herman on November 18, 2021, 12:01:02 PM
Indeed. At the root of all this anger and anxiety is this disappointment that life is just not that great all the time. It's one of the reasons why there are so few teenagers and adolescents among the angry mobs. Usually very young people are easily mobilized. However, young people have yet to experience the midlife crisis that's feeding these protests.

It seems that Trump won in 2016 because he carried three swing states (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swing_state) by small majorities.  Some have argued that the win was on account of swinging only 77,000 votes.

The strategy, purportedly, was based on Cambridge Analytica's detailed individual profiles derived from their info on Facebook.  Susceptible individuals in the key states were individually targeted on Facebook by misinformation authored by Trump supporters.  As I heard it, the personalities most target show neurotic anxieties.

See ... https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/may/06/cambridge-analytica-how-turn-clicks-into-votes-christopher-wylie (https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/may/06/cambridge-analytica-how-turn-clicks-into-votes-christopher-wylie)

Also ... https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/17/us/politics/cambridge-analytica-trump-campaign.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/17/us/politics/cambridge-analytica-trump-campaign.html)

This from The Guardian article ...

"Those 253 predictions were the "secret sauce" that Cambridge Analytica claimed it could offer its customers. Using Facebook itself, advertisers are limited to broad demographic strokes, and a few narrower algorithmically determined categories – whether you like jazz music, say, or what your favourite sports team is. But with 253 further predictions, Cambridge Analytica could, Wylie says, craft adverts no one else could: a neurotic, extroverted and agreeable Democrat could be targeted with a radically different message than an emotionally stable, introverted, intellectual one, each designed to suppress their voting intention – even if the same messages, swapped around, would have the opposite effect." {emphasis add}
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on November 19, 2021, 05:30:26 AM
Quote from: milk on November 17, 2021, 03:34:33 AMThis is a losing political message. I fear for where this leads (the return of trump). Democrats need to give up on this identity oppression obsession and craft policies for all working people who are all affected by long-term trends.

You are missing the point. The Democrats have convinced the American public to vote for them. The Republican-controlled legislatures have engineered the voting districts (gerrymandering) so that Republicans win more seats even though Democrats get more votes. This does not apply to the Senate, which is set up to give disproportionate representation to low-population states. It applies to the house of representatives where Republicans get more representatives elected even when more people in the state vote for the Democrat. It is facilitate by exhaustive data about how many people vote Republican and Democrat in each geographic location, allowing them to pile supermajorities of democrats into a small number of districts and small majorities of Republicans into a large number of districts.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on November 19, 2021, 09:50:36 AM
I have just heard the Rittenhouse verdict and I am sick  :(

If Rittenhouse was black or Latino he would have been found guilty.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on November 19, 2021, 04:07:52 PM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on November 19, 2021, 05:30:26 AM
You are missing the point. The Democrats have convinced the American public to vote for them. The Republican-controlled legislatures have engineered the voting districts (gerrymandering) so that Republicans win more seats even though Democrats get more votes. This does not apply to the Senate, which is set up to give disproportionate representation to low-population states. It applies to the house of representatives where Republicans get more representatives elected even when more people in the state vote for the Democrat. It is facilitate by exhaustive data about how many people vote Republican and Democrat in each geographic location, allowing them to pile supermajorities of democrats into a small number of districts and small majorities of Republicans into a large number of districts.

Yes. And this is why if you add up the aggregate vote in recent Congressional elections, even when Dems have lost seats they've done so with a substantial majority of the popular vote.   
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on November 19, 2021, 08:47:47 PM
Quote from: arpeggio on November 19, 2021, 09:50:36 AM
I have just heard the Rittenhouse verdict and I am sick  :(

If Rittenhouse was black or Latino he would have been found guilty.

O. J. Simpson was found not guilty. Casey Anthony was found not guilty.  We know they did it, but the justice system doesn't always work in favor of emotional feeling but rather the evidence of the case. Were the jury members in the Rttenhouse case bought off? Were there any Black or Hispanic people in this particular jury? I didn't see the jury members, so I'm not sure, but I don't think race was the issue here.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on November 19, 2021, 09:27:50 PM
Well, from the very first videos that came out, it was an obvious case of self-defense. So seems it all went on course.

And just another though- to have someone who rapes little boys off of this planet, I don't feel sad about that at all. Good riddance.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on November 19, 2021, 11:13:30 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on November 19, 2021, 08:47:47 PM
O. J. Simpson was found not guilty.

O.J. was rich and famous.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Que on November 20, 2021, 02:30:11 AM
Quote from: arpeggio on November 19, 2021, 09:50:36 AM
I have just heard the Rittenhouse verdict and I am sick  :(

If Rittenhouse was black or Latino he would have been found guilty.

If he would have been black, killing two white men, they would have fried him on the chair.

So nothing wrong with a minor armed with an assault rifle roaming the streets as a vigilante and then acting "in self defence".

This is a society that persists in its traditional doctrine that violence is not a problem but a solution. Provided of course, that the violence is applied by the "right kind" of people....
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on November 20, 2021, 02:36:18 AM
For us on the sideline, I noticed that the verdict is final, he can't be charged in relation to the events again, in any way.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 20, 2021, 03:19:34 AM
Quote from: Que on November 20, 2021, 02:30:11 AM
If he would have been black, killing two white men, they would have fried him on the chair.

So nothing wrong with a minor armed with an assault rifle roaming the streets as a vigilante and then acting "in self defence".

This is a society that persists in its traditional doctrine that violence is not a problem but a solution. Provided of course, that the violence is applied by the "right kind" of people....
I don't know why you assume this or how it helps. The only thing I agree with is that money helps: having quality lawyers is necessary and makes the system unfair. I don't know about this hypothetical but there was really no way to convict Rittenhouse on the evidence. So this was fair. Whether or not some other hypothetical would have been less fair seems well beside the point. The media lies went on and on and left people with the wrong impression (that Rittenhouse's mother drove him (OMG) across state lines (OMG) with a gun., for example. The prosecution went with the "active shooter" theory too - which was unpersuasive. I think it's monumentally stupid to go to a riot zone with a gun. But that applies to the criminal Rittenhouse shot (who had an illegal weapon as well). Rosenberg provoked this as well and he probably should have been in an institution instead of out on the streets.
I'm not on the right but it was obvious to me that Rittenhouse was innocent from a legal standpoint.
Having said all this, I definitely would rather live in a country without guns. I can raise my kids without fear of shootings and gun violence. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Que on November 20, 2021, 04:04:03 AM
Quote from: milk on November 20, 2021, 03:19:34 AM
I don't know why you assume this or how it helps. The only thing I agree with is that money helps: having quality lawyers is necessary and makes the system unfair. I don't know about this hypothetical but there was really no way to convict Rittenhouse on the evidence. So this was fair. Whether or not some other hypothetical would have been less fair seems well beside the point. The media lies went on and on and left people with the wrong impression (that Rittenhouse's mother drove him (OMG) across state lines (OMG) with a gun., for example. The prosecution went with the "active shooter" theory too - which was unpersuasive. I think it's monumentally stupid to go to a riot zone with a gun. But that applies to the criminal Rittenhouse shot (who had an illegal weapon as well). Rosenberg provoked this as well and he probably should have been in an institution instead of out on the streets.
I'm not on the right but it was obvious to me that Rittenhouse was innocent from a legal standpoint.
Having said all this, I definitely would rather live in a country without guns. I can raise my kids without fear of shootings and gun violence.

Well, I'm not ruling out that he was acquitted in accordance with the law. Ultimately he was attacked, so I'm not surprised by the verdict. And still I think that if he would have been black, an acquittal would have been very unlikely no matter the legalities or circumstances.

But that doesn't mean he was without blame. Why was he there in the first place? With an illegal weapon? Walking around with an assault rifle he might have been seen a threat by those that attacked him.

The whole concept of militia of "upstanding citizens" enforcing justice is fundamentally racist anyway.
Would the police accept groups of armed black or Hispanic "upstanding citizens" roaming the streets during riots?  ::)
I wouldn't be surprised if they would be shot on the spot...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on November 20, 2021, 04:19:58 AM
Quote from: Que on November 20, 2021, 04:04:03 AM
Well, I'm not ruling out that he was acquitted in accordance with the law. Ultimately he was attacked, so I'm not surprised by the verdict. And still I think that if he would have been black, an acquittal would have been very unlikely no matter the legalities or circumstances.

But that doesn't mean he was without blame. Why was he there in the first place? With an illegal weapon? Walking around with an assault rifle he might have been seen a threat by those that attacked him.

The whole concept of militia of "upstanding citizens" enforcing justice is fundamentally racist anyway.
Would the police accept groups of armed black or Hispanic "upstanding citizens" roaming the streets during riots?  ::)
I wouldn't be surprised if they would be shot on the spot...

Yes, ultimately he was attacked.  It's not surprising that a person will defend him/herself with the means available.  If his attacker assumed Rittenhouse would not shoot him because he, the attacker, was unarmed, he was foolish

It's given that Rittenhouse was a gaping asshole and should never gone to the demonstration at all, much less with a gun.

Here in Canada, assuming no actual shots fired, Rittenhouse would have been immediately charged with the illegal transportation of a prohibited weapon, (assault-style rifle), and flagrant misuse of a firearm.  On that account alone he would be facing at least a couple years in the slammer.  Unfortunately state-side the 2nd Amendment and the hodge-podge of ridiculous state laws give Rittenhouse a pass.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 20, 2021, 04:34:50 AM
Quote from: Que on November 20, 2021, 04:04:03 AM
Well, I'm not ruling out that he was acquitted in accordance with the law. Ultimately he was attacked, so I'm not surprised by the verdict. And still I think that if he would have been black, an acquittal would have been very unlikely no matter the legalities or circumstances.

But that doesn't mean he was without blame. Why was he there in the first place? With an illegal weapon? Walking around with an assault rifle he might have been seen a threat by those that attacked him.

The whole concept of militia of "upstanding citizens" enforcing justice is fundamentally racist anyway.
Would the police accept groups of armed black or Hispanic "upstanding citizens" roaming the streets during riots?  ::)
I wouldn't be surprised if they would be shot on the spot...
I agree that groups of armed black people would be treated differently by the police. On the other hand, all this postulating gets tricky. I think it should be very illegal to have these guns outside of hunting or perhaps home protection. And there should be more rules IMO.  And society still has a ways to go on issues of race. Of course I did watch people of all backgrounds destroy Minneapolis and Kenosha and do lots of crazy stuff in places like Evergreen university. And I still think the evidence of police killing black people is flimsy at best. A very small number of people are killed each year and a fraction of those are black and a very small fraction aren't in possession of weapons. So the premise of these protests was terrible. The original flame was lit over Blake who was treated as a hero by Biden but is a criminal who pretty much created his destiny.
Still, Rittenhouse got fair treatment especially because he had expensive representation. As far as the racism charge, maybe yes the police wouldn't have reacted the same but you can hardly say Rittenhouse did'n't suffer from a relentless rush to judgement and distortion of facts. There's a case to be made that the media would have been much fairer if the situation was different and the narrative was more favorable to left-wing sensibilities. Lots of details in the case were interpreted by pundits and the mob in very stupid ways. The whole hullabaloo about the judge disallowing the term "victim" is one example of biased media and liberal hypocrisy. So, yes to possible racism if things were different and yes to prejudice all along against Rittenhouse here.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 20, 2021, 06:58:03 AM
Quote from: Que on November 20, 2021, 04:04:03 AM
Well, I'm not ruling out that he was acquitted in accordance with the law. Ultimately he was attacked, so I'm not surprised by the verdict. And still I think that if he would have been black, an acquittal would have been very unlikely no matter the legalities or circumstances.

All good sense (alas!) esp. in the case of the hypothetical black defendant.

Hard as it seems, the Rittenhouse verdict provides common ground for a divided America

By Dennis Aftergut Updated November 19, 2021, 6:16 p.m.

It's easy to see why Americans are divided about the acquittal of 18-year-old Kyle Rittenhouse. There is understandable outrage among the millions of Americans, Black and white, who feel that Rittenhouse was, by bringing an AR-15 style [weapon] to a volatile situation in Kenosha, Wis., a provocateur who got away with murder. Many also feel that the judge in the case tilted the playing field too steeply in favor of Rittenhouse's defense.

There are two things on which all sides should agree. First, deep sympathy for the families of Joseph Rosenbaum, 36, and Anthony Huber, 26, whom Kyle Rittenhouse killed, and demonstrator Gaige Grosskreutz, now 28, whom he wounded, during a 2020 Black Lives Matter protest in Kenosha.

Second, once emotions subside, everyone might step back and appreciate this incontrovertible demonstration of a fundamental precept of American justice. By design, the government, with its enormous resources, is meant to face an onerous burden when it attempts to convict anyone of a crime and take away a person's most precious asset, their liberty. As the18th-century legal authority Sir William Blackstone memorably put it, "The law holds that it is better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer."

Thus, good criminal defense lawyers, like the ones here, serve all of us by testing the government's proof. That's what this former federal prosecutor, who never defended a person accused of crime, believes.

The real injustice is that the heavy burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt has not regularly been a feature of criminal justice when the defendant is a person of color, particularly Black. Thursday's commutation of Julius Darius Jones's death sentence is Exhibit A in that case. The governor of Oklahoma acted after the state's Pardon and Parole Board recommended that he commute Jones' sentence, and after "[ s ]everal members of the panel said they doubted the evidence that led to Jones' conviction." But he was denied any possibility of parole after 20 years in prison for a crime where the burden of proof appears not to have been met. So now he has no immediate opportunity to demonstrate his innocence in a fatal shooting during a carjacking in 1999.

The Rittenhouse jury agreed unanimously that the prosecution failed in meeting that burden. Whatever we might feel about the judge, or about the ability of a then-17-year-old to carry a gun to a protest, we have to appreciate that the jury's unanimous agreement on that point is difficult to ignore when the jury knew that two people are dead and another was wounded as a result of Rittenhouse's actions.

Some say that 3½ days of deliberations was long. In fact, the time taken demonstrates a level of consciousness in wrestling with an extraordinarily difficult decision. It would have helped Americans' trust in the verdict if there had been more than one Black juror in a pool of 20, even acknowledging that Kenosha is only 12 percent Black.

The jury obviously believed that at least the evidence created a reasonable doubt, including testimony that the survivor whom Rittenhouse had shot pointed a gun at him. We can blame the prosecutors or judge all we want, but that stubborn fact was almost surely insurmountable in a self-defense case.

The jury also watched Rittenhouse lose control on the witness stand. While the cynical prosecutor in me wondered how carefully Rittenhouse had been prepared, it's hard to dispute that he felt remorse for the deaths he caused.

Remorse is not a legal defense to crime, but jurors are human beings who cannot be expected to put aside their feelings. It's a very hard thing for jurors to know that their guilty verdict can subject a young person to a lifetime in prison.

We must allow for those hurt and offended by the verdict to experience their loss and anger, and to demonstrate it peacefully for as long as their grief lasts. Ultimately though, Americans need reasons to come together. Holding up together the ideal of innocence until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt should be common ground for all of us.

Dennis Aftergut is a former federal prosecutor.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on November 20, 2021, 07:10:32 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on November 20, 2021, 02:36:18 AM
For us on the sideline, I noticed that the verdict is final, he can't be charged in relation to the events again, in any way.

It is possible a federal prosecutor might look for a way to charge him with a federal crime, and/or one or more of the people he shot might file a civil suit. But I don't think either possibility is likely to succeed.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Que on November 20, 2021, 07:17:34 AM
I think it it is understandable that the focus of the debate is on whether Rittenhouse should or shouldn't have been convicted.

But I think it pointless. The real issue here is that without the toxic cocktail produced by American society: a socio-economical divide unprececented in the Western world, racial tensions, high level of violence, private gun ownership and allowing civic militias, none of this would have happened.

Most of you are not going to like it, but I will say it anyway: the US is looking more and more like a South American country.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on November 20, 2021, 07:52:12 AM
Quote from: JBS on November 20, 2021, 07:10:32 AM
It is possible a federal prosecutor might look for a way to charge him with a federal crime, and/or one or more of the people he shot might file a civil suit. But I don't think either possibility is likely to succeed.

That's not an option that reports here consider possible, but I can't tell if you're right.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Que on November 20, 2021, 09:10:41 AM
Quote from: milk on November 20, 2021, 04:34:50 AM
I agree that groups of armed black people would be treated differently by the police

I think it is a bit more than that: in real life US society applies double standards to the so much revered "constitutional right" to bear arms and the right of self defense.... As in: those rights are meant for whites only.

QuoteAnd I still think the evidence of police killing black people is flimsy at best. A very small number of people are killed each year and a fraction of those are black and a very small fraction aren't in possession of weapons. So the premise of these protests was terrible. The original flame was lit over Blake who was treated as a hero by Biden but is a criminal who pretty much created his destiny.

I think mulling over the question whether the black minority is disproportionately affected by police brutality,  is again missing the real issue. I think it is fair to say that for a democratic society, the conduct of US police is generally quite violent and brutal. And because police mostly deals with the socio-economic disadvantaged, black people will be at the wrong end of the stick more often than others... But why is the police so heavy handed? Because of the ample availability of guns and the high level of acceptance of violence. Which is not to say there is no racial bias. Just ask any regular black man, leading the life of an "upstanding citizen" how often he has been stopped by the police. I'm sure you'll figure it out...

QuoteStill, Rittenhouse got fair treatment especially because he had expensive representation. As far as the racism charge, maybe yes the police wouldn't have reacted the same but you can hardly say Rittenhouse did'n't suffer from a relentless rush to judgement and distortion of facts. There's a case to be made that the media would have been much fairer if the situation was different and the narrative was more favorable to left-wing sensibilities. Lots of details in the case were interpreted by pundits and the mob in very stupid ways. The whole hullabaloo about the judge disallowing the term "victim" is one example of biased media and liberal hypocrisy. So, yes to possible racism if things were different and yes to prejudice all along against Rittenhouse here.

So he became the focus point of societal polarisation and political bias. Considering the circumstances, I really don't feel sorry for him...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on November 20, 2021, 12:07:09 PM
So shouldn't the person most responsible be whoever gave the order for the police to not interfere with the riots? Shouldn't they be prosecuted for this?
Because when the police aren't doing their job, they should assume that vigilantes will pop up- whether you agree or disagree whether they should, it's inevitable it will happen. And then retarded shit like this will happen.


Quote from: Que on November 20, 2021, 07:17:34 AM
Most of you are not going to like it, but I will say it anyway: the US is looking more and more like a South American country.
There may be similarities (especially if your only exposure to the US is the news, which is always mostly negative), but still, the demand from immigration doesn't lie. Quite a difference from a typical South American country- people really want to live here more, so despite some of the issues, it can't be that bad. I've known many immigrants and the consensus is that they like it here.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on November 20, 2021, 12:18:36 PM
Quote from: Que on November 20, 2021, 04:04:03 AM

Would the police accept groups of armed black or Hispanic "upstanding citizens" roaming the streets during riots?  ::)


You dont have to wonder. Open carry laws were very quickly changed in California when the Black Panthers started doing it - and being very careful to do it within the limits of the law.

And who was the then governor who pushed through this liberty-curtailing, second amendment-hating legislation that, I assume, made him a pariah to conservatives?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 20, 2021, 01:14:21 PM
Spotsylvania comes to its senses and rescinds order banning books in school libraries
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 20, 2021, 01:29:39 PM
Dana Milbank:

To the extent McCarthy had a theme, it was that he was very, very angry — about everything, and it's all Democrats' fault. Part Donald Trump and part Howard Beale, McCarthy seemed to think that what Republicans crave is rage — partisan, purposeless, inchoate and ungrammatical rage.

When one Democrat gave him the (standard) admonition to address his remarks to the speaker, McCarthy flew into a fury. "I can look anywhere I want, Mr. Speaker! ... They now want to dictate to a member of the floor of where I can look! Are you afraid of the basis of the information in the bill?! Sir, I'm gladly to look at you, Mr. Speaker!"

He misquoted the Gettysburg Address. He delivered messages from Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan. "I'd love to debate Jim Crow one day," he remarked. He mentioned Hitler, Mussolini, Jimmy Carter's sweater and the provenance of baby carrots. He extolled the freedoms enjoyed by the Chinese people: "I promise you this. China is not adding 87,000 IRS agents to go after their people." He asked the House: "You know what Taiwan is?"

How could such a high official in the United States sound so barking mad?

Approaching the midway point, McCarthy offered a clue about his state of mind. "Madam Speaker, today I got my booster shot," he reported. "I got a little headache now."

Research shows that for some people, a side effect of the coronavirus vaccine is irritability. In the most extreme cases, the effect is so bad they even get angry at fact-checkers.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on November 20, 2021, 02:59:02 PM
Quote from: Mirror Image on November 19, 2021, 08:47:47 PM
O. J. Simpson was found not guilty. Casey Anthony was found not guilty.  We know they did it, but the justice system doesn't always work in favor of emotional feeling but rather the evidence of the case. Were the jury members in the Rttenhouse case bought off? Were there any Black or Hispanic people in this particular jury? I didn't see the jury members, so I'm not sure, but I don't think race was the issue here.

It is so easy to check out the make up of the jury.  I did.

Look it up for yourselves.

And comparing this case to OJ is a false equivalency.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on November 20, 2021, 03:11:53 PM
Many years ago I served on a jury that decided a case where there was and altercation where the defendant almost killed a man.

We do not have a stand your ground law in Virginia and we did not have one back then.

The defendant claimed self-defense.

We found him guilty of a lessor charge that did not result in jail time (It was over thirty years ago so I can not remember all of the details).  We felt that the defendant could have avoided the situation.  He had an argument with the victim in a bar.  He followed him to the parking lot where they continued that argument which resulted in the altercation where he almost killed the other man.  For the record they were both white.

To this day I think we made the right decision.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Que on November 20, 2021, 11:16:39 PM
Quote from: arpeggio on November 20, 2021, 03:11:53 PM
Many years ago I served on a jury that decided a case where there was and altercation where the defendant almost killed a man.

We do not have a stand your ground law in Virginia and we did not have one back then.

The defendant claimed self-defense.

We found him guilty of a lessor charge that did not result in jail time (It was over thirty years ago so I can not remember all of the details).  We felt that the defendant could have avoided the situation.  He had an argument with the victim in a bar.  He followed him to the parking lot where they continued that argument which resulted in the altercation where he almost killed the other man.  For the record they were both white.

To this day I think we made the right decision.

Thanks for that. Quite an experience and it must have made a big impression. And it does seem you made a fair decision.

Under Dutch law, to invoke self defense for a full acquittal several strict conditions have to be met.
Amongst which the condition that the defendant had not some blaim in the confrontation, was not seeking it, didn't provoke the attack and had no reasonable option to avoid it. Next conditions are that the threat was immediate and that the violence used as defence was necessary and proportionate.

Quote from: greg on November 20, 2021, 12:07:09 PM

There may be similarities (especially if your only exposure to the US is the news, which is always mostly negative),

My exposure to the US is not limited to the news.

Quotebut still, the demand from immigration doesn't lie. Quite a difference from a typical South American country- people really want to live here more, so despite some of the issues, it can't be that bad. I've known many immigrants and the consensus is that they like it here.

So the main difference is that the US is very rich and most Latin American countries are poor?
Well, that is very true indeed. And I'm sure that the millions in the US that are living below the poverty line will be relieved to hear that good news.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on November 20, 2021, 11:26:14 PM
I think conditions are about the same in DK as in NL.
The reports here are that the verdict was correct - that is, within the current, local legal framework.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Que on November 20, 2021, 11:32:55 PM
Quote from: MusicTurner on November 20, 2021, 11:26:14 PM
I think conditions are about the same in DK as in NL.
The reports here are that the verdict was correct - that is, within the current, local legal framework.

Well, I guess for us shooting some random stranger that shows up at our doorstep, is not really an option.  ;)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on November 20, 2021, 11:37:35 PM
No, there's been an intense debate about allowing pepper sprays for self defense. It has now been allowed to have one in your home, but for carrying it around, you need to get a rather exceptional permission, due to a special situation. The debate is still ongoing ...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 21, 2021, 10:08:42 AM
Quote from: Que on November 20, 2021, 11:32:55 PM
Well, I guess for us shooting some random stranger that shows up at our doorstep, is not really an option.  ;)

Seems rather a wild tangent 8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Que on November 21, 2021, 12:38:02 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 21, 2021, 10:08:42 AM
Seems rather a wild tangent 8)

Indeed!  8)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_doctrine
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: LKB on November 21, 2021, 03:56:31 PM
Quote from: Que on November 20, 2021, 07:17:34 AM
I think it it is understandable that the focus of the debate is on whether Rittenhouse should or shouldn't have been convicted.

But I think it pointless. The real issue here is that without the toxic cocktail produced by American society: a socio-economical divide unprececented in the Western world, racial tensions, high level of violence, private gun ownership and allowing civic militias, none of this would have happened.

Most of you are not going to like it, but I will say it anyway: the US is looking more and more like a South American country.

Actually, we're not nearly as close to becoming a banana republic as we were a year ago, when President F**ktard was still in office. Something to keep in mind, and remain grateful for as Biden's first term continues.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 21, 2021, 04:08:43 PM
Quote from: Que on November 20, 2021, 09:10:41 AM
I think it is a bit more than that: in real life US society applies double standards to the so much revered "constitutional right" to bear arms and the right of self defense.... As in: those rights are meant for whites only.

I think mulling over the question whether the black minority is disproportionately affected by police brutality,  is again missing the real issue. I think it is fair to say that for a democratic society, the conduct of US police is generally quite violent and brutal. And because police mostly deals with the socio-economic disadvantaged, black people will be at the wrong end of the stick more often than others... But why is the police so heavy handed? Because of the ample availability of guns and the high level of acceptance of violence. Which is not to say there is no racial bias. Just ask any regular black man, leading the life of an "upstanding citizen" how often he has been stopped by the police. I'm sure you'll figure it out...

So he became the focus point of societal polarisation and political bias. Considering the circumstances, I really don't feel sorry for him...
much of this is besides the point. I don't feel sorry for him either but the point was whether he was the beneficiary or recipient of bias. I contend the media was biased against him and this often led to out and out lies and hypocrisy. If this hadn't been caught on video, he'd likely be in jail. I think what left wing politicians and public figures are arguing for now is jury nullification and mob justice. To say Rittenhouse's acquittal is the result of a white supremacist system is untrue, incendiary, irresponsible, and corrosive. You may be right that there's a double standard in the way police behave. I take your point: if protestors had shown up carrying assault rifles, what would have happened? On the other hand, protestors did burn down businesses, etc. We're seeing this behavior in Minneapolis, Portland, etc. ETA: I do think a white person carrying a rifle on his back is going to get treated differently than a person of color. That's an issue in American society. I  also don't want to live in a country that allows guns outside of hunting and home protection. I want to see many restrictions. But the activist left wanted mob justice and without it they want to tear down the system.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 21, 2021, 04:38:08 PM
Quote from: milk on November 21, 2021, 04:08:43 PM
But the activist left wanted mob justice and without it they want to tear down the system.

That is a problem, no doubt.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 21, 2021, 04:59:19 PM
Fresh grief in Wisconsin

A car plowed through the Waukesha Christmas Parade and more than 20 people are injured, authorities say
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on November 21, 2021, 05:53:54 PM
Quote from: milk on November 21, 2021, 04:08:43 PM
much of this is besides the point. I don't feel sorry for him either but the point was whether he was the beneficiary or recipient of bias. I contend the media was biased against him and this often led to out and out lies and hypocrisy. If this hadn't been caught on video, he'd likely be in jail. I think what left wing politicians and public figures are arguing for now is jury nullification and mob justice. To say Rittenhouse's acquittal is the result of a white supremacist system is untrue, incendiary, irresponsible, and corrosive. You may be right that there's a double standard in the way police behave. I take your point: if protestors had shown up carrying assault rifles, what would have happened? On the other hand, protestors did burn down businesses, etc. We're seeing this behavior in Minneapolis, Portland, etc. ETA: I do think a white person carrying a rifle on his back is going to get treated differently than a person of color. That's an issue in American society. I  also don't want to live in a country that allows guns outside of hunting and home protection. I want to see many restrictions. But the activist left wanted mob justice and without it they want to tear down the system.

I agree. But the fact that when the Kenosha police encountered KR he was encouraged and given beverages rather than being asked to prove he was eligible to carry an assault weapon might indicate exactly that. Do you think a black child of that age with such a weapon would have been treated that way? Of course not. Why do you think that is? 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 21, 2021, 07:44:36 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on November 21, 2021, 05:53:54 PM
I agree. But the fact that when the Kenosha police encountered KR he was encouraged and given beverages rather than being asked to prove he was eligible to carry an assault weapon might indicate exactly that. Do you think a black child of that age with such a weapon would have been treated that way? Of course not. Why do you think that is?
Even if a black person with a gun professed being there in support of police, he likely would have been greeted with skepticism at the very least. That's my guess. Of course it's hard to get one's mind out of the context which was great anger at police on the part of the black community generally. But I'm not arguing there isn't a lot of racism in America (and Japan - where I live).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on November 22, 2021, 04:03:34 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on November 21, 2021, 05:53:54 PM
I agree. But the fact that when the Kenosha police encountered KR he was encouraged and given beverages rather than being asked to prove he was eligible to carry an assault weapon might indicate exactly that. Do you think a black child of that age with such a weapon would have been treated that way? Of course not. Why do you think that is?

As already commented upon ... in Canada Rittenhouse would have been immediately arrested for carrying a gun as he did because it is manifestly against the law here.  At least as fundamental as systemic racism in this case are the ludicrously permissive US gun laws.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 22, 2021, 06:40:23 AM
Opinion: What the Rittenhouse trial tells us about race and vigilantism

By Jennifer Rubin, Columnist

Today at 10:00 a.m. EST

In the wake of Kyle Rittenhouse's acquittal for killing two men and seriously injuring a third, the right celebrated the reckless actions of a teenager, seemingly intent on encouraging vigilante justice. President Biden initially told reporters that he accepted the verdict and believes that the jury system works. A longer statement later acknowledged: "While the verdict in Kenosha will leave many Americans feeling angry and concerned, myself included, we must acknowledge that the jury has spoken."

Over the weekend, we heard more precise and searing explanations for the sadness and frustration many Americans felt. NAACP President and CEO Derrick Johnson said on CBS's "Face the Nation":

Here you have a 17-year-old who ... traveled across state lines to protect property that was not his, for owners who did not invite him, and he put himself in harm's way based on the rhetoric that he's seen on social media platforms. So, it's hard to reconcile the verdict with the experience that many African Americans have faced over several decades.

The issue outside the courtroom is not reasonable doubt or the right of self-defense; it is a justice system in which Black Americans do not get the same quotient of reasonable doubt and are not granted the same right of self-defense as White Americans. That so many White people claim not to understand this (or, worse, take umbrage at being informed about it) bodes ill for a diverse society. Increased social cohesion and trust are impossible so long as the majority group lacks empathy and treats every challenge to the status quo (which works so well for them) as a threat.

Many Americans are convinced that Rittenhouse would have been convicted if he were Black (that is, if police had not used deadly force against him, as has happened in many instances when officers have engaged with unarmed African Americans). Had Black Americans routinely been accorded the same right of self-defense as White defendants, and had police routinely been punished for their excessive and unprovoked use of force against Blacks, the jury's verdict would be more widely accepted.

Byron Pitts of ABC News reiterated on "This Week" the sense that Rittenhouse's Whiteness afforded him protection that young Black men do not receive:

[F]or many people, it's not a debate. It's a cold, hard reality. In America, there's one justice system if you are White and wealthy. There is another if you are poor and a person of color.

Study after study shows that Black men are arrested more often, convicted more often, and sentenced to longer sentences than White men accused of the same crime, and the same is — holds true in discipline in schools, that disparity. ...

According to the FBI, a — a fatal shooting where the shooter is White and the victim is Black, [is] three times more likely that's ruled to be justifiable if both parties were White. And so I think for most reasonable people, and most surveys would bear this out, ... few reasonable people would believe that if a 17-year-old Black boy with an AR-15 showed up in Kenosha, Wisconsin, at night, killed two people and injured a third, then that Black boy would have been treated the same way by police or by the legal justice system.


This is the essence of Black Lives Matter.

As Johnson patiently explained, "It's a value proposition that the lives of African Americans have been diminished and our lives matter. ... Do we value the lives of not only African Americans, but everyone?" The permission structure that entices Whites to "take up the mantle" of vigilante justice perfectly reflects the political message they have received from the MAGA movement. "We had a white supremacist in the White House, and it opened the door to this floodgate of vigilante violence," Johnson continued.

The specific issue of vigilantism, which in case after case poses a greater threat to non-Whites, requires a better response from responsible politicians. The right's cheerleading ("vigilantism good") was not matched by a clear response from Democrats on the use of force.

Former prosecutor David Henderson speaking on NBC's "Meet the Press" on Sunday did better than many elected Democrats. He related what he wanted to hear from Vice President Harris as a person of color and former prosecutor: " 'Folks, let's be reasonable about keeping each other safe.' And I think she can say, 'I respect the jury's verdict, although we've got a long way to go.'"

In other words, with Second Amendment rights come responsibilities, not the least of which is parental responsibility. (What were Rittenhouse's parents thinking?) The right's virulent emphasis on individual rights (no masks, no vaccines, no limits on open carry) has effectively elevated self-esteem and selfishness to a fine art form. It has become fundamentally hostile to the qualities we need in a diverse, democratic society: self-discipline, kindness, deferred gratification, civility and empathy. That is what Democrats need to address.

And it is not surprising that the moral vacuum in right-wing politics is evident among the most prominent Republican constituency, White evangelicals. "The aggressive, disruptive, and unforgiving mindset that characterizes so much of our politics has found a home in many American churches," Republican and evangelist Peter Wehner wrote in the Atlantic recently. The MAGA movement's pugilism, resentment, belligerence, suspicion, toxic masculinity and zero-sum viewpoint have saturated many churches, where lust for Christian nationalism displaces biblical values:


{I}t isn't simply the case that much of what is distinctive about American evangelicalism is not essential to Christianity; it is that now, in important respects, much of what is distinctive about American evangelicalism has become antithetical to authentic Christianity. What we're dealing with — not in all cases, of course, but in far too many — is political identity and cultural anxieties, anti-intellectualism and ethnic nationalism, resentments and grievances, all dressed up as Christianity.


Wehner also writes that an often-besieged group of evangelicals argues that a spiritual reawakening, a return to actual religious values, is desperately needed. He's right — and that is a long-term proposition.

While the chasm in perception and experience between Black and White Americans is not solely the responsibility of government nor resolvable through legislation (e.g., self-defense laws, jury direction), politicians do make a difference. Sadly, as the "leaders" on the right race to catch up to the mob, they try to outdo one another in worship of violence and cultivation of White grievance. If Democrats really want to recapture the values debate, they would start talking a whole lot more about personal and parental responsibility, empathy, self-restraint and civic-mindedness. The country could use it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 22, 2021, 06:48:51 AM
Beloved 'Dancing Grannies' among those killed after driver plows through Wisconsin Christmas parade
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 22, 2021, 07:29:31 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 22, 2021, 06:48:51 AM
Beloved 'Dancing Grannies' among those killed after driver plows through Wisconsin Christmas parade

Person of Interest in Wisconsin Parade Rampage Had Just Posted Bail on Violent Charges
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Klavier1 on November 22, 2021, 12:07:58 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 22, 2021, 07:29:31 AM
Person of Interest in Wisconsin Parade Rampage Had Just Posted Bail on Violent Charges
I can't vouch for this website (using red font for the word "right" is troubling), but here is an article about that upstanding citizen:

https://www.wisconsinrightnow.com/2021/11/22/darrell-brooks-criminal-record/
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on November 22, 2021, 01:43:08 PM
Groveland Four: US judge clears black men wrongly accused of rape after 72 years.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59379946
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 22, 2021, 01:46:47 PM
Quote from: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on November 22, 2021, 01:43:08 PM
Groveland Four: US judge clears black men wrongly accused of rape after 72 years.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59379946 (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59379946)

None of the accused men lived to see themselves exonerated.

Thomas was hunted down by a posse of more than 1,000 men shortly after the alleged incident and was shot hundreds of times.

The three others were beaten in custody, before being convicted by all-white juries. Samuel Shepherd was later shot and killed by a sheriff while travelling to a retrial.


Their lives were destroyed.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on November 22, 2021, 02:05:42 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 22, 2021, 01:46:47 PM
None of the accused men lived to see themselves exonerated.

Thomas was hunted down by a posse of more than 1,000 men shortly after the alleged incident and was shot hundreds of times.

The three others were beaten in custody, before being convicted by all-white juries. Samuel Shepherd was later shot and killed by a sheriff while travelling to a retrial.


Their lives were destroyed.

You are right on all counts. Probably it's not a big deal unless a similar thing happens to white people. This is a news at BBC and none of the USA media discuss this.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 22, 2021, 02:06:37 PM
Quote from: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on November 22, 2021, 02:05:42 PM
You are right on all counts. Probably it's not a big deal unless a similar thing happens to white people. This is a news at BBC and none of the USA media discuss this.

Heart-breaking.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 22, 2021, 07:02:12 PM
Quote from: Fëanor on November 22, 2021, 04:03:34 AM
As already commented upon ... in Canada Rittenhouse would have been immediately arrested for carrying a gun as he did because it is manifestly against the law here.  At least as fundamental as systemic racism in this case are the ludicrously permissive US gun laws.
what's the systematic racism in the Rittenhouse case? White guy with a gun gets chased by white guys, one of whom has a gun, two are criminals who had no business in Wisconsin. They tried to take his weapon. I agree with your first point: it's reckless to allow these guns in public, whether Rittenhouse or the other guy with the illegal gun. But there's nothing about systematic racism in this case.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on November 22, 2021, 07:35:06 PM
Quote from: milk on November 22, 2021, 07:02:12 PM
what's the systematic racism in the Rittenhouse case? White guy with a gun gets chased by white guys, one of whom has a gun, two are criminals who had no business in Wisconsin. They tried to take his weapon. I agree with your first point: it's reckless to allow these guns in public, whether Rittenhouse or the other guy with the illegal gun. But there's nothing about systematic racism in this case.

The riots were sparked by the Jacob Blake shooting, for one thing.
Rittenhouse was "defending" against people who were protesting systemic racism and the system that maintains it. So he was defending racism, and the American Right has lionized him as a result.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on November 22, 2021, 09:23:01 PM
Quote from: Que on November 20, 2021, 11:16:39 PM
So the main difference is that the US is very rich and most Latin American countries are poor?
Well, that is very true indeed. And I'm sure that the millions in the US that are living below the poverty line will be relieved to hear that good news.
We still have a large middle class, even if it is shrinking over time. I believe that's why they want to come here, at least out of the ones I know. (Usually it's locals in the dirt poor areas far so more than immigrants).
Pretty sure poverty in the US and Latin countries is not even in the same ballpark, though. There are probably better similarities to make between them than this.
But if you were to say that the gap between rich and poor is growing in the US (and the rich and poor gap in Latin American countries is wide), then yeah, totally true.


Quote from: JBS on November 22, 2021, 07:35:06 PM
Rittenhouse was "defending" against people who were protesting systemic racism
You mean like the pedo that got shot, who was yelling at him repeatedly, "Come at me, shoot me, n***!"?

Totally respectable gentleman, quality peaceful protesting in support of innocent black people. Surely during his prison years his heart softened and he became a BLM supporter, upholding righteous social values and committing his vision towards ethics and peaceful demonstrations.
I mean, that's totally all there is to it, no other details needed. Just protesting systemic racism like a good boy.

btw, the idea of making a really small statue of him is still making me laugh. Maybe actually he wasn't a pedo, but at his size the children looked like adults, so he got confused for a second.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Que on November 22, 2021, 11:15:51 PM
Quote from: greg on November 22, 2021, 09:23:01 PM
But if you were to say that the gap between rich and poor is growing in the US (and the rich and poor gap in Latin American countries is wide), then yeah, totally true.

Yes. And it is a large degree of socio-economic inequality that breeds social tensions, violence, crime, corruption and authoritarianism.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 22, 2021, 11:55:13 PM
Quote from: JBS on November 22, 2021, 07:35:06 PM
The riots were sparked by the Jacob Blake shooting, for one thing.
Rittenhouse was "defending" against people who were protesting systemic racism and the system that maintains it. So he was defending racism, and the American Right has lionized him as a result.
there might be another point of view on this. Blake was not a victim of racism but a criminal, in commission of a crime, with a dangerous weapon - by admission. You say Rittenhouse was defending racism? Huh. The case didn't probe his brain but I guess there were businesses burnt to the ground. We're those businesses defending racism as well? You can justify anything if you know what goes on inside people's brains.
I do think it's very stupid to carry guns around, especially to rallies. Rittenhouse deserves some moral blame - legally innocent though he obviously was. The people he shot aren't blameless either.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on November 23, 2021, 05:48:21 AM
BLM is, in my view, almost irrelevant to this. In the U.S. any breakdown of order, such as a power failure, will bring out mobs that violently riot and loot. There were peaceful demonstrations during the day, and mayhem, including looting and arson, at night. I doubt there was a great deal of overlap between the daytime and nighttime crowds.

Controlling the rioting was the responsibility of the police, and the national guard had been called out. The fact that right-wing militias organized on social media to "patrol the streets" means that there were two lawless gangs on the streets, one heavily armed. It is technically correct that the three individuals were trying to take Rittenhouse's weapon away and he was technically acting in self defense. The first rule off carrying a weapon is that if you can't let your adversary take it away from you, lest your enemy use it on you. From the point of view of Rittenhouse's victims, they were disarming an active shooter situation involving a panicky child with a military-stye weapon. In my view Rittenhouse is morally responsible for their deaths, because he provoked a situation where he would have no choice but to shoot people to death.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on November 23, 2021, 07:35:22 AM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on November 23, 2021, 05:48:21 AM
BLM is, in my view, almost irrelevant to this. In the U.S. any breakdown of order, such as a power failure, will bring out mobs that violently riot and loot. There were peaceful demonstrations during the day, and mayhem, including looting and arson, at night. I doubt there was a great deal of overlap between the daytime and nighttime crowds.

Controlling the rioting was the responsibility of the police, and the national guard had been called out. The fact that right-wing militias organized on social media to "patrol the streets" means that there were two lawless gangs on the streets, one heavily armed. It is technically correct that the three individuals were trying to take Rittenhouse's weapon away and he was technically acting in self defense. The first rule off carrying a weapon is that if you can't let your adversary take it away from you, lest your enemy use it on you. From the point of view of Rittenhouse's victims, they were disarming an active shooter situation involving a panicky child with a military-stye weapon. In my view Rittenhouse is morally responsible for their deaths, because he provoked a situation where he would have no choice but to shoot people to death.

I think all this is entirely correct, including that Rittenhouse has moral responsibility.

I'll point out again the absurdly liberal guns laws in the USA made the event possible.  In most other nations Rittenhouse would scarcely have had the chance to be provocative because he would have been immediately arrested for the illegal position and/or gross misuse of a  firearm.

Inevitably it will take a long time to stamp out systemic racism:  it isn't something that can be eliminated by changing a few laws, (though it would help).  OTOH, a few changes to Federal and state gun laws would entirely have prevented the Rittenhouse incident.  Unfortunately the 2nd Amendment is a convenient alibi for inaction.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 23, 2021, 09:42:57 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on November 23, 2021, 07:35:22 AM
I think all this is entirely correct, including that Rittenhouse has moral responsibility.

I'll point out again the absurdly liberal guns laws in the USA made the event possible.  In most other nations Rittenhouse would scarcely have had the chance to be provocative because he would have been immediately arrested for the illegal position and/or gross misuse of a  firearm.

Inevitably it will take a long time to stamp out systemic racism:  it isn't something that can be eliminated by change a laws, (though it would help).  OTOH, a few changes to Federal and state gun laws would entirely have prevented the Rittenhouse incident.  Unfortunately the 2nd Amendment is a convenient alibi for inaction.

And makes "thoughts and prayers a black comedic punchline.

Breaking: Kevin Strickland is exonerated after 43 years in prison, one of the longest wrongful convictions in U.S. history
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 23, 2021, 10:03:44 AM
Posting because it ends well.

Lost someone to Fox News? Science says they may be addicted to anger

By Linda Rodriguez McRobbie May 1, 2019, 12:58 p.m.

IN THE 1980s, Frank Senko found himself behind the wheel of his car for several hours each day, commuting. He didn't really care for music, but he didn't want to be bored. So he tuned into talk radio.

And then he started to change.

Frank had always been the neighborhood "fun dad," goofy and friendly; he was a Democrat and a "hippie before there were hippies," his daughter said — happy to live and let live. Not anymore. "He became more irritable, cranky, irascible, a little more judgmental with people," said Jen Senko, his daughter.

It got worse. After Frank retired in the early 1990s, he discovered Rush Limbaugh's immensely popular daily radio show. "He began having these three-hour Limbaugh lunches in the kitchen," Senko said. Her mother couldn't stand the sound of Limbaugh's voice — "He always seemed to be yelling," she'd say — and so she had her lunch in the living room. Not long after, Frank installed heavy sliding glass doors between the two rooms so he could listen undisturbed.

A man who'd made his children read for an hour before bedtime, who always told them that higher education was the most worthwhile thing they could do, became suspicious of universities as liberal incubators. A man who used to stop people on the street when he heard an accent he didn't recognize to say hello now didn't like immigrants or Hispanic people. A man who'd welcomed his children's gay friends into his home "didn't want it in his face" anymore.

"He became a person we hated being around and we didn't know. It was like that movie [Invasion of the Body Snatchers]: 'What happened to Dad?'" said Senko. "It was a really horrible period of time for us . . . It was a nightmare, both my brothers blocked him, I blocked him." Senko's stomach clenched every time she thought of visiting. Her dad was angry all the time. And Senko knew exactly what was to blame: The steady drip-feed of outrage he listened to every day.

Senko turned the story of her dad's descent into anger into a 2016 documentary called "The Brainwashing of My Dad," narrated by Matthew Modine. The film was partly funded by 947 Kickstarter donations, many from people who had dads, moms, and loved ones who had plunged down the rage-filled rabbit hole of talk news and emotionally predatory media platforms. Exposure to angry media had turned loved ones into angry people, cloaked in righteousness, their families didn't recognize. "It was insane — you understand how cults operate," said Senko.

It's still happening: Actor Mark Ruffalo recently tweeted that he'd lost an uncle to Fox News.

Anger's ubiquity, its stickiness, indicates that we get something out of it. Frank Senko's anger had become a habitual response to perceived threats and cues, a repeated behavior for a specific reward that led him to abandon the values he'd taught his own children and isolate himself to simmer in the vitriol coming over the airwaves. Senko had another way to describe her dad's behavior: "He was addicted."

PUT SIMPLY, SCIENCE agrees that we can get fixated on our own anger; the actual mechanism of this addiction is fascinatingly complex.

When we feel outrage, we're responding to a potent cocktail of neurochemical reactions, physiological sensations, and conditioned responses. It's a survival mechanism linked to our deepest, oldest brain system, the limbic system.

Any perceived threat — physical, metaphysical, ideological, or imagined — causes the amygdalae, the two almond-shaped bundles of neurons in the medial temporal lobe, to alert the brain to prepare for a fight (or flight). This signal causes the release of the neurotransmitter dopamine, as well as the stress hormones cortisol, adrenaline, and noradrenaline, which kick-start our sympathetic nervous system, causing oxygen levels in the blood and glucose levels in the brain to rise. Our heart rate, blood sugar levels, and blood pressure go up — energizing us for a fight.

This rush of neurochemicals has a transformative effect on our behavior. We might yell, clench our fists, or fume, signaling to everyone around us that we're ready to blow up. At the same time, more subtle changes are happening. Notably, the mix disrupts our ability to think logically and makes a mess of our short-term memories. Noradrenaline and cortisol in particular suppress function in the prefrontal cortex, the area of the brain tasked with executive decision making. Cortisol also diminishes activity in the hippocampus, which is implicated in making short-term memories; this might be why it's hard to remember what you were going to say during an argument, or later, what you said in a fit of rage. "The nature of anger is that it shuts off your cortex, your logic center, your thinking — it's literally overriding that center of your brain," said Dr. Jean Kim, a psychiatrist for the US Department of Health and Human Services.

Consider the Incredible Hulk, the green and grunting embodiment of unchecked fury. When mild mannered Bruce Banner becomes the Hulk, the normally careful and thoughtful scientist suddenly has the power to smash his way through injustice. The Hulk gets things done when Banner can't; there's an expediency to his anger.

But even if we don't start swinging, expressions of anger force others to pay attention; this can be a shortcut to resolving conflict, but it can also reinforce the idea that rage equals power. A 2018 study from the University of Geneva found that humans notice and identify an aggressive voice much more quickly than a normal or happy voice.

All of this — the neurochemical rush, as well as others' respect or fear of our rage — can be intoxicating. Humans are primed to perceive people who express anger as more competent and confident, and the more we use anger to dominate or control others (or to protect ourselves), the more this outrage shapes our identity: "People get a literal rush from getting angry," Kim explained. "It feels good. It feeds into your sense of self and you end up liking it."

Locking in the addictive effects of anger is dopamine, the neurochemical that hangs around after a flare-up, creating a post-tirade glow. Dopamine is a "feel good" hormone — it's released when we have sex, eat good food, cuddle, exercise. Certain highly addictive drugs, such as methamphetamines, mimic dopamine in the brain. It tells us to keep doing that thing again and again, often leading to behavior patterns consistent with addiction.

It should be noted that some mental health professionals reserve the word "addiction" to describe substance abuse only, yet compulsive behaviors — too much sex and porn, hoarding, gambling, eating or not eating — share many substance abuse characteristics. If you can't stop chasing the rewards despite devastating consequences — broken relationships, job loss, isolation, physical harm — then you're mimicking addictive behavior.

That would certainly describe Frank Senko's transformation from mellow dad to raging talk show junkie. "Anger is intoxicating," his daughter observed when Frank went on daily anger benders. Those infusions of righteous anger — stoked by Rush Limbaugh and later, Fox News — gave him repeated hits of neurochemical stimulation, as well as a sense of purpose. In other words, the anger made him feel alive.

ANGER ACTS LIKE a virus, spreading quickly from talk show host to passive listener, in part because all human emotions are contagious. We experience emotional contagion every day — when our partner is in an irritable mood, we're more likely to feel flashes of irritation; when we go to a ball game, we're lifted by the good cheer of the crowd (or depressed because . . . insert Cleveland Browns joke here).

In the 1990s, a series of studies demonstrated the power of emotional contagion. When subjects saw pictures of happy human faces, they reported feeling happy; when they saw sad faces, they were sad. Further research revealed that the stronger the emotion, the more easily it is transferred between people. One 2009 study found that when people who weren't lonely spent time with lonely people, they became lonelier.

Emotional contagion has been observed in other primates, birds, even in dogs: One study from the Clever Dog Lab at the University of Vienna found that dogs became uneasy when they heard recordings of other dogs or, fascinatingly, humans in distress.

For humans, emotional contagion makes evolutionary sense: Our success as a species evolved out of our ability to function and cooperate in groups; rapid emotional communication would keep groups safe and cohesive. If there's a danger — a herd of wildebeests heading straight for the camp, another tribe's raiding party — it was crucial that panic and fear be communicated quickly. Equally, emotional mimicry helped people understand one another better and improve bonding. And though emotions are best communicated through face-to-face interaction, according to researchers, they easily traverse our modern networks of digital connections.

And guess what? Rage goes viral quicker than any other emotion. A study from Beihang University in China found that on Sina Weibo, China's answer to Twitter, joy spread faster than sadness, but outrage outran them all. Researchers from the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania who analyzed the most emailed New York Times articles over a three-month period for their emotional tone found that the only feeling that outpaced anger was awe. "Anger is a high-arousal emotion, which drives people to take action," Jonah Berger, the marketing professor who conducted the study, told Smithsonian. "It makes you feel fired up, which makes you more likely to pass things on."

AN EMERGING BODY of work suggests that media outlets, finely tuned to capitalize on our emotions, are affecting how we feel about every aspect of our lives.

Outrage is certainly proliferating. It's an attention-grabbing emotion that pushes engagement, which makes it easy to exploit by social media and news outlets. A 2018 Pew Research survey found social media users are most often amused online, but nearly as often, they experience anger; the same survey found that 59 percent of users frequently saw other people online looking for opportunities to start arguments.

Indeed, fury is thriving in the current media landscape, argues Tufts University sociologist Sarah Sobieraj, co-author of the 2014 book, "The Outrage Industry." In the scramble for listeners and clicks, vitriol sells, and sells, and sells. "Things that give you a strong emotional reaction are pretty effective [at attracting attention]," she says. "So yes: Anger, fear, moral indignation, these types of things are the news equivalents of what we see in the entertainment industry — sex and violence."

And there's a clear trajectory, notes Sobieraj, from the 1987 repeal of the Federal Communication Commission's Fairness Doctrine — the mandate requiring TV and radio broadcasters to present a spectrum of relevant viewpoints on controversial issues — to the increase in anger-fueled rhetoric. Deregulating the media allowed disturbingly polarized content to dominate the airwaves, and then the Internet. Indeed, all kinds of emotionally charged content has proliferated.

While all partisan news outlets follow the emotionally exploitative playbook, Sobieraj says, right-wing outlets have so far deployed it with more success — talk radio is around 90 percent conservative. Rage disrupts logical thought, reducing complex issues to black and white answers: build the wall, lock her up, make it great. However, the polemical nature of right-wing rhetoric may be pushing people on the left to react accordingly. When anger addicts find a medium that resonates with them, they may not recognize how emotionally affected they are by the fiery rhetoric. "It doesn't sound like outrage when you agree with it," says Sobieraj. "It sounds like someone truth-telling and so it feels great — that's why this content is successful."

Inundated by extreme viewpoints designed to stoke emotions, Americans may be feeling more threatened, and therefore, more irate. A 2016 Esquire/NBC survey found that half of all Americans were angrier than they had been the year before; 31 percent of respondents were enraged by something in the news a few times a day, while 37 percent were angry once a day. Meanwhile, acts of road rage involving firearms have more than doubled since 2014, according to The Trace.

Perhaps related, perhaps not, there has also been a sharp rise in hate crimes in the US — up 17 percent in 2017 from the previous year. Even pop music appears to be trending negative: A study of the Billboard Top 100 pop songs between 1951 and 2016 found that anger in lyrics increased by 232 percent, while joy decreased by 38 percent.

OUR EMOTIONS HELP us engage with the world; they make us care about what we're reading, hearing, and looking at. And good news does sell, which is why stories about adopting kittens or helping homeless people go viral. The problem is that we, as humans, are primed to respond with more focus and attention to negative arousal emotions like rage. It's easy to fall into a big, angry feedback loop of outrage and reward.

Substance abusers often need to increase their dosage to feel the same high; the anger machine works the same way. "If you're used to seeing a lot of highly emotional language that triggers emotions like anger, you're probably going to need increasingly sensational language to get your attention because your standard, your baseline changes," said Dr. Julia Shaw, a London-based psychologist whose new book, "Making Evil," examines why people do bad things. Shaw didn't agree that anger could technically be an addiction, but she did agree that the feeling can inspire compulsion. "In that sense, [engagement with angry media] mimics what we might consider addictive behavior in that we need more of the same hit to get the same high."

Senko, however, would argue that her father was addicted to the anger. Hearing people rant for hours every day, Frank began mirroring that behavior; then he needed it more. "We're not as unmalleable as we like to think we are. Media has a powerful effect on we humans," she said. "You are what you watch, eat, and read."

But there is hope. You can quit anger. Senko's dad did, before his death at the age of 93 in 2016 — with a little help. After his radio broke, he stopped listening to the talk shows; he and Senko's mother started eating lunch together again. He stopped watching Fox News when they got a new TV and his wife programmed the remote with all her channels. And while he spent a week in the hospital recovering from kidney stones, his family quietly unsubscribed him from the right-wing emails he'd been getting.

"He became happy. And adorable. And we became friends again. And he and my mother got along really great," said Senko. "The last couple years of his life, he was himself again, and we had him back."


Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 23, 2021, 10:33:01 AM
Jury holds pharmacies responsible for role in opioid crisis

By JOHN SEEWER The Associated Press, Updated November 23, 2021, 38 minutes ago

CLEVELAND (AP) — Three retail pharmacy chains recklessly distributed massive amounts of pain pills in two Ohio counties, a federal jury said Tuesday in a verdict that could set the tone for U.S. city and county governments that want to hold pharmacies accountable for their roles in the opioid crisis.

The counties blamed pharmacies operated by CVS, Walgreens and Walmart for not stopping the flood of pills that caused hundreds of overdose deaths and cost each of the two counties about $1 billion, their attorney said.

This was the first time pharmacy companies had completed a trial to defend themselves in a drug crisis that has killed a half-million Americans over the past two decades.

Lake and Trumbull counties were able to convince the jury that the pharmacies played an outsized role in creating a public nuisance in the way they dispensed pain medication into their communities.

Attorneys for the three pharmacy chains maintained they had policies to stem the flow of pills when their pharmacists had any concerns and would notify authorities about suspicious orders from doctors.

They also said it was the doctors who controlled how many pills were being prescribed for legitimate medical needs.

Two other chains — Rite Aid and Giant Eagle — already have settled lawsuits with the two Ohio counties.

Attorney Mark Lanier, who represented the counties in the lawsuit, said during the trial that the pharmacies were attempting to blame everyone but themselves.

The opioid crisis has overwhelmed courts, social services agencies and law enforcement in Ohio's blue-collar corner east of Cleveland, leaving behind heartbroken families and babies born to addicted mothers, Lanier told jurors.

Roughly 80 million prescription painkillers were dispensed in Trumbull County alone between 2012 and 2016 — equivalent to 400 for every resident.

In Lake County, some 61 million pills were distributed during that period.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 23, 2021, 11:26:48 AM
On the nailing of neo-Nazis:

Spencer, Kessler, Cantwell and other white supremacists found liable in deadly Unite the Right rally
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 23, 2021, 03:27:53 PM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on November 23, 2021, 05:48:21 AM
BLM is, in my view, almost irrelevant to this. In the U.S. any breakdown of order, such as a power failure, will bring out mobs that violently riot and loot. There were peaceful demonstrations during the day, and mayhem, including looting and arson, at night. I doubt there was a great deal of overlap between the daytime and nighttime crowds.

Controlling the rioting was the responsibility of the police, and the national guard had been called out. The fact that right-wing militias organized on social media to "patrol the streets" means that there were two lawless gangs on the streets, one heavily armed. It is technically correct that the three individuals were trying to take Rittenhouse's weapon away and he was technically acting in self defense. The first rule off carrying a weapon is that if you can't let your adversary take it away from you, lest your enemy use it on you. From the point of view of Rittenhouse's victims, they were disarming an active shooter situation involving a panicky child with a military-stye weapon. In my view Rittenhouse is morally responsible for their deaths, because he provoked a situation where he would have no choice but to shoot people to death.
maybe the guy with the skateboard. Rosenbaum was a mentally ill criminal who made multiple threats and chased Rittenhouse for no reason. He yelled some nasty stuff I won't repeat but to the effect of, "you won't do anything" and, "if I get you alone I'll kill you." In his unbalanced state, he thought he could get the weapon. He'd been doing destructive illegal things all of that night. The other guy who got shot but survived also had an illegal weapon. I don't know what he thought he was doing but he's morally responsible for thinking it's ok to wave guns around. I'll agree about the guy with the skateboard. He may have thought he was acting heroically. He may have thought Rittenhouse was an "active shooter."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 25, 2021, 04:29:34 PM
With guilty verdicts for Ahmaud Arbery's murderers, a whisper of justice
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 25, 2021, 07:44:14 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 25, 2021, 04:29:34 PM
With guilty verdicts for Ahmaud Arbery's murderers, a whisper of justice
"How a Prosecutor Addressed a Mostly White Jury and Won" is the New York Times headline. How did the prosecutor get the jury to see through their whiteness? It's some kind of miracle.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on November 26, 2021, 09:27:39 AM
Quote from: milk on November 25, 2021, 07:44:14 PM
"How a Prosecutor Addressed a Mostly White Jury and Won" is the New York Times headline. How did the prosecutor get the jury to see through their whiteness? It's some kind of miracle.

Sarcasm I hope ^ ^ ^. If not: The case was open-and-shut and exceptionally well-argued by the state. It's just insulting to think that sane adults of any race or disposition would fail to reach the obvious verdicts under the circumstances.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 26, 2021, 09:38:56 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on November 26, 2021, 09:27:39 AM
Sarcasm I hope ^ ^ ^. If not: The case was open-and-shut and exceptionally well-argued by the state. It's just insulting to think that sane adults of any race or disposition would fail to reach the obvious verdicts under the circumstances.

If this case had taken place in 1965 Georgia. The obvious verdict would have proven to be something different. Even now, I hesitate to hope that we are in a much better place.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on November 26, 2021, 12:24:55 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 26, 2021, 09:38:56 AM
If this case had taken place in 1965 Georgia. The obvious verdict would have proven to be something different. Even now, I hesitate to hope that we are in a much better place.

This case wouldn't have taken place in 1965 Georgia for the same reason it almost didn't today — the prevalence of white supremacists in law enforcement. I think your hesitation is well warranted but we can hope because perhaps they're less prevalent in the general population(?)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 26, 2021, 12:39:29 PM
Incidentally, "It has been another week during which a reporter asked whether Joe Biden will run for president in 2024" gives us poster children of "journalists" determined not to do their work properly, i.e. there are far more important question they should be asking.

For Democrats, whether Biden will run in 2024 might be less relevant than these 3 underlying questions

By James Pindell Globe Staff, Updated November 26, 2021, 7:34 a.m.

It has been another week during which a reporter asked whether Joe Biden will run for president in 2024. And another week that saw the answer to that question not exactly resolved.

"He is. That's his intention," said White House press secretary Jen Psaki aboard Air Force One as the president was on his way to celebrate an early Thanksgiving with troops in North Carolina on Monday. Psaki's comments echoed what Biden himself said shortly after taking office, when he told reporters during his first press conference in March that it was his "intention" to run again.

But in many ways the "will Biden run in 2024?″ question is the version of the "what is up with Trump and Russia?" question during the previous administration. Each question was always around, always driving chatter inside Washington, and never fully resolved. Remember, for Biden, the questions about whether he would be a single-term president began before he even ran in 2020. The question was then repeatedly asked and not totally answered several times before a primary vote was cast. It then came up again in the general election.

Unlike all the Russia probes, however, there will eventually be a clean answer on Biden and 2024. He will either be on the ballot or he won't.

And while Trump set up his formal reelection campaign the moment he was inaugurated, that was an unprecedented move. Barack Obama didn't formally announce his reelection plans until the April after the 2010 midterm elections. If Biden were to follow Obama's timeline, then he has nearly a year and a half to make a decision. Then again, no one seriously doubted Obama was going to seek reelection.

Beyond all the speculating, the questions beneath the question about Biden and 2024 are probably more important and instructive for Democratic politics in 2021.

Question 1: But why wouldn't Biden run?

Very few American presidents have openly taken reelection off the table: One of them, James K. Polk, announced it the moment he received his party's presidential nomination in 1844. His decision was part ideological — as a believer in limited government power — and practical: agreeing to only serve one term was likely the only way he could build a coalition of party power brokers to back him for the nomination.

Biden has different issues. The reason people talk about him serving only one term is largely due to his age. At 78, he was the oldest person ever elected to serve as president in 2020. He could break that record if he ran again in 2024 at age 82.

Mental and physical capacity to serve as the leader of the free world is something that voters must determine for themselves. While plenty of data is available from Biden's doctors, it is still a subjective decision by every voter in how to read the data.

But lately, there is a second reason that people, including Democrats, are asking whether Biden will run: his poor poll numbers.

Now 10 months into his presidency, Biden's approval ratings have never been this low. A Marist poll out on Wednesday showed him at just 42 percent, in line with other recent polls. This means Biden is the most unpopular president at this point in his presidency, other than Donald Trump.

Question 2: Can anyone other than Biden win?

Aides have already signaled in anonymous quotes to the press that if Biden does run it might be out of a sense of duty. The 2020 election turned out to be much closer than Democrats thought it would be. It is possible that among all the Democrats who ran in the 2020 primary — the most diverse field in history and one of the largest — only Biden could have defeated Trump for reelection.

With Trump looking more likely than not to run again, the Trump factor is not off the table. And the field of potential candidates is basically the same crew that ran in 2020.

And, yes, if Biden doesn't run it likely would be a crew. The most obvious heir apparent to Biden, his vice president Kamala Harris, had a 28 percent approval rating in one recent poll.

This has led to open speculation, even this week, that Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg could run. Buttigieg would not only be among the youngest people to be elected president, but also the first openly gay person.

Let's be clear here: Even after winning the Iowa Caucuses and coming in a close second in the New Hampshire primary, the Democratic electorate didn't think Buttigieg could win (or that he sufficiently understood the Black vote). It is unclear whether a stint as transportation secretary would change that.

Question 3: If Biden doesn't run how badly will tensions within the party explode?

As anyone could see during the Democratic presidential primary season or witness this year during negotiations over infrastructure and "Build Back Better" legislation, there is a lot of tension within the party.

The party's base has moved left and wants leaders who are not old white men. There is also an establishment, led by Biden and South Carolina Representative James Clyburn, who feel like they are more in tune with Democrats and the electorate as a whole.

That next year the Republicans could win big because of Biden, prompting Biden and his allies to say that only proves that Biden has to run, is the conundrum.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 26, 2021, 04:33:10 PM
Exonerated former inmate Kevin Strickland won't get compensation from Missouri, so donors raised $1 million
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: amw on November 26, 2021, 06:06:50 PM
It is actually interesting to follow the online white supremacist right—the "anime nazis" who have largely replaced the III%ers and Oath Keepers and Knights of the White Camellia at neo-confederate rallies—and their reaction to three high-profile trials in which some degree of white supremacy was implicated. They were extremely keen for Rittenhouse to become a martyr so they could riot, but practically as soon as he walked, immediately began to dismiss him as a plant, a liberal roleplaying as a white supremacist, a BLM supporter, etc (with one account spending significant amounts of time analysing his skeletal structure and fat distribution and concluding that he was secretly transgender and therefore an agent of the New World Order); they meanwhile completely ignored the Arbery and Charlottesville trials except for the usual mutterings about how the Tyrannical Government is persecuting them, the Unite the Right organisers were all RINOs and neolib cucks anyway, and Someday There Shall Be A Race War and so on. IOW, it seems like the fact that not all three trials ended in convictions took a great deal of the wind out of their sails, whereas if Rittenhouse had been convicted, they would have hailed him as one of their own and promised to avenge him in blood. As a movement, they evidently cannot exist without the conspiratorial belief that the political system is repressing them somehow, and without this victimhood complex, can't really achieve political unity.

Instead, Rittenhouse has become a beloved figure of a particular breed of ex-liberal (e.g., Glenn Greenwald, Bill Maher) who delights in contrarianism for the sake of it. These people can still claim victimhood by complaining about how their media friends don't invite them to cocktail parties anymore now that they no longer profess liberal views; in their view the real victim is neither Rittenhouse nor the people he killed, but themselves, for being "cancelled". Plenty of prominent conservatives have also attempted this over the years (e.g., Stefan Molyneux, Lauren Southern, etc.) with a lower degree of success.

This is not 1965 Georgia because things no longer break down cleanly on racial lines but similar kinds of repression still do exist. Class relationships have become somewhat more important; the Atlanta Police Department is approximately 80% black and still kills, hurts and arrests black people at elevated rates compared to their share of the population. Why? Most of the victims/arrestees come from poor inner-city neighbourhoods in South Atlanta, whereas the average salary for the police officers is in the six figures and the majority of them live in neighbouring suburban DeKalb County, the second-wealthiest black-majority county in the USA. Essentially, while there are not as many white supremacists in law enforcement, white supremacy was only ever a proxy for class supremacy and that's still very much real. The white men who killed Ahmaud Arbery could (if I recall correctly) be accurately characterised as working-class; Brunswick, GA remains a town divided between a declining post-industrial urban core where no one (white or black) is particularly well off and wealthy, fast-growing carpetbagger coastal enclaves, and if it was someone from the latter who'd been found responsible, it's unlikely there would have been a criminal trial at all, or at best the charge would have been something like involuntary manslaughter and punished via community service.

edit: people on Twitter have also claimed that the police responding to the call initially didn't arrest the killers, and in fact it was not until video footage was leaked to the public that they were actually taken into custody and charged. Twitter is of course not a reliable source but that does seem to be true, although it's unclear exactly what happened (and incompetence—police have historically had a very low clearance rate for murder—seems more likely than malice).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on November 26, 2021, 07:22:11 PM
It doesn't make sense to me that BLM has become so closely associated with the issue of police violence. Statistics indicate that black people are disproportionately affected by police violence, but the level of police violence against all people (regardless of race) is very high. The number of people killed by police in the U.S. is four times higher than in Canada (per capita), and that dwarfs the black/white disparity in the U.S.

There are many other ways that U.S. culture treats black lives as though they don't matter, through economic and educational disparity.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on November 26, 2021, 07:32:18 PM
Quote from: amw on November 26, 2021, 06:06:50 PM
It is actually interesting to follow the online white supremacist right—the "anime nazis" who have largely replaced the III%ers and Oath Keepers and Knights of the White Camellia at neo-confederate rallies—and their reaction to three high-profile trials in which some degree of white supremacy was implicated. They were extremely keen for Rittenhouse to become a martyr so they could riot, but practically as soon as he walked, immediately began to dismiss him as a plant, a liberal roleplaying as a white supremacist, a BLM supporter, etc (with one account spending significant amounts of time analysing his skeletal structure and fat distribution and concluding that he was secretly transgender and therefore an agent of the New World Order); they meanwhile completely ignored the Arbery and Charlottesville trials except for the usual mutterings about how the Tyrannical Government is persecuting them, the Unite the Right organisers were all RINOs and neolib cucks anyway, and Someday There Shall Be A Race War and so on. IOW, it seems like the fact that not all three trials ended in convictions took a great deal of the wind out of their sails, whereas if Rittenhouse had been convicted, they would have hailed him as one of their own and promised to avenge him in blood. As a movement, they evidently cannot exist without the conspiratorial belief that the political system is repressing them somehow, and without this victimhood complex, can't really achieve political unity.

Instead, Rittenhouse has become a beloved figure of a particular breed of ex-liberal (e.g., Glenn Greenwald, Bill Maher) who delights in contrarianism for the sake of it. These people can still claim victimhood by complaining about how their media friends don't invite them to cocktail parties anymore now that they no longer profess liberal views; in their view the real victim is neither Rittenhouse nor the people he killed, but themselves, for being "cancelled". Plenty of prominent conservatives have also attempted this over the years (e.g., Stefan Molyneux, Lauren Southern, etc.) with a lower degree of success.

This is not 1965 Georgia because things no longer break down cleanly on racial lines but similar kinds of repression still do exist. Class relationships have become somewhat more important; the Atlanta Police Department is approximately 80% black and still kills, hurts and arrests black people at elevated rates compared to their share of the population. Why? Most of the victims/arrestees come from poor inner-city neighbourhoods in South Atlanta, whereas the average salary for the police officers is in the six figures and the majority of them live in neighbouring suburban DeKalb County, the second-wealthiest black-majority county in the USA. Essentially, while there are not as many white supremacists in law enforcement, white supremacy was only ever a proxy for class supremacy and that's still very much real. The white men who killed Ahmaud Arbery could (if I recall correctly) be accurately characterised as working-class; Brunswick, GA remains a town divided between a declining post-industrial urban core where no one (white or black) is particularly well off and wealthy, fast-growing carpetbagger coastal enclaves, and if it was someone from the latter who'd been found responsible, it's unlikely there would have been a criminal trial at all, or at best the charge would have been something like involuntary manslaughter and punished via community service.

edit: people on Twitter have also claimed that the police responding to the call initially didn't arrest the killers, and in fact it was not until video footage was leaked to the public that they were actually taken into custody and charged. Twitter is of course not a reliable source but that does seem to be true, although it's unclear exactly what happened (and incompetence—police have historically had a very low clearance rate for murder—seems more likely than malice).

In reference to the Arbery case, I believe the reason for not arresting anyone at the start was active interference (by the prosecutor who herself is now facing charges) by people in the State Attorney's Office.  The intereference was not overtly because of white supremacy, but a result of the social network  which excludes PoC as a result of racism: one of the three killers was a former LEO who had worked with the prosecutors on earlier cases. The people who interfered were in effect trying to protect a personal friend.

To your larger point about the police: I don't think class differences are the key. Many of those LEOs after all have the same socio-cultural background as the people they arrest. I think the problem lies in the basic nature of police: the people chosen by the authorities to inflict violence on the authorities' behalf. IOW the officially sponsored thugs.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: amw on November 26, 2021, 08:01:59 PM
Quote from: JBS on November 26, 2021, 07:32:18 PM
In reference to the Arbery case, I believe the reason for not arresting anyone at the start was active interference (by the prosecutor who herself is now facing charges) by people in the State Attorney's Office.  The intereference was not overtly because of white supremacy, but a result of the social network  which excludes PoC as a result of racism: one of the three killers was a former LEO who had worked with the prosecutors on earlier cases. The people who interfered were in effect trying to protect a personal friend.
That makes sense as well.

Quote
To your larger point about the police: I don't think class differences are the key. Many of those LEOs after all have the same socio-cultural background as the people they arrest. I think the problem lies in the basic nature of police: the people chosen by the authorities to inflict violence on the authorities' behalf. IOW the officially sponsored thugs.
True. But it is notable that police have become one of the more highly-paid professions in many cities, thereby giving people from these disadvantaged backgrounds a "leg up" financially (in some cases for the first time in their family's history), but with the expectation that they will inflict said violence in support of said social networks as a result—something that they then become deeply invested in due to the personal stakes now involved. As Baron Scarpia mentioned above, police do after all kill quite a lot of white people as well; these are just almost exclusively people outside the social networks. And the culture in a lot of police departments aims to desensitise officers to committing acts of violence, to the point where it spills over on an interpersonal level as well (e.g., there's a high rate of domestic violence in police families), while fostering a culture of protecting one's own (extending also to prosecutors, DAs, etc) that very quickly turns into a siege mentality as soon as any person within that network receives any kind of public criticism, let alone is accused of a crime. This in turn often seems to result in police precincts becoming hotbeds of conspiracy theories, paranoia, and general insecurity, which then leads to even more police violence, etc. In general therefore, a policeman's lot is not a happy one, but not for the reasons G&S alluded to.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 27, 2021, 04:15:19 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 26, 2021, 09:38:56 AM
If this case had taken place in 1965 Georgia. The obvious verdict would have proven to be something different. Even now, I hesitate to hope that we are in a much better place.
I was being sarcastic but that's true. These bubbas almost got away with it. I have to say that the prosecutor was masterful.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 27, 2021, 04:29:56 AM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on November 26, 2021, 07:22:11 PM
It doesn't make sense to me that BLM has become so closely associated with the issue of police violence. Statistics indicate that black people are disproportionately affected by police violence, but the level of police violence against all people (regardless of race) is very high. The number of people killed by police in the U.S. is four times higher than in Canada (per capita), and that dwarfs the black/white disparity in the U.S.

There are many other ways that U.S. culture treats black lives as though they don't matter, through economic and educational disparity.
I think the main issues get sidelined: just my opinion. Health care, education, living wages, transportation, worker's rights. BLM focuses on the wrong things IMO. Blake, for example, had a weapon and was committing a crime. He was going for a knife; he refused to comply; he'd already been tasered. It's always sad when any person of any ethnicity gets shot by the cops but it's a small number and the number without weapons is even lower. There seems to be good evidence that racism plays a role in who's stopped and that can lead to insane tragedies like the case of Philando Castile. But it's rare. Plenty of my lefty friends justified all those protests that burned down police stations and businesses. All these young people today wasting their time on these things when they really should be or could be doing something positive in the community.
I think the democratic party is putting itself out of business. Did I write this already? Bill Maher's line was that the dems are saying something like, "white people suck; vote for us." And he said it's like saying to a girl at a party, "you're ugly, do you want to dance?"
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: amw on November 27, 2021, 06:36:19 AM
Quote from: milk on November 27, 2021, 04:29:56 AMBlake, for example, had a weapon and was committing a crime. He was going for a knife; he refused to comply; he'd already been tasered.
Hypothetically, in some kind of imaginary world where the job of police officers is not to hurt people but rather to promote public safety and order, a police officer could deescalate such a situation, convince the person to surrender their weapon and talk them down from whatever crime they planned to commit. (in fact this skill is regularly performed by mental health professionals, social workers, child protection services, teachers, parents/family members, clergy, etc.... and also by police officers when confronting, say, white supremacist mass shooters such as Dylann Roof)

Quote from: milk on November 27, 2021, 04:29:56 AMPlenty of my lefty friends justified all those protests that burned down police stations and businesses. [....]
I think the democratic party is putting itself out of business.
The police precinct that was burned down was in the city of Minneapolis. If you have a chance, look up what political party controls the Minneapolis police department, city council, mayoralty, all county-wide elected officials, the state governorship, and majorities in the state legislature, and then consider whether the people engaged in armed insurrection against that political party would, in fact, be supporters of that political party.

(In fact, this is also the case in almost every city I can think of that has seen anti-police protests and riots, from Ferguson to Kenosha. Mostly blue cities; all facing down intense and unequal police violence, structural racism, and economic hardship. If protestors and activists are trying to tear down the Democratic Party, perhaps it's simply because they recognise who their oppressors are. Not that you don't also see this in red cities—e.g., there were protests in Tulsa as well—but there's simply fewer red cities with large black/minority populations to oppress to begin with.)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 28, 2021, 07:22:52 AM
Quote from: amw on November 27, 2021, 06:36:19 AM
Hypothetically, in some kind of imaginary world where the job of police officers is not to hurt people but rather to promote public safety and order, a police officer could deescalate such a situation, convince the person to surrender their weapon and talk them down from whatever crime they planned to commit. (in fact this skill is regularly performed by mental health professionals, social workers, child protection services, teachers, parents/family members, clergy, etc.... and also by police officers when confronting, say, white supremacist mass shooters such as Dylann Roof)
The police precinct that was burned down was in the city of Minneapolis. If you have a chance, look up what political party controls the Minneapolis police department, city council, mayoralty, all county-wide elected officials, the state governorship, and majorities in the state legislature, and then consider whether the people engaged in armed insurrection against that political party would, in fact, be supporters of that political party.

(In fact, this is also the case in almost every city I can think of that has seen anti-police protests and riots, from Ferguson to Kenosha. Mostly blue cities; all facing down intense and unequal police violence, structural racism, and economic hardship. If protestors and activists are trying to tear down the Democratic Party, perhaps it's simply because they recognise who their oppressors are. Not that you don't also see this in red cities—e.g., there were protests in Tulsa as well—but there's simply fewer red cities with large black/minority populations to oppress to begin with.)
I don't really buy it. The police were called on Blake because he was a serial abuser, he was where he shouldn't have been, and they wanted him on warrants too. Ok, Monday morning quarterback says maybe they could have done something better but the facts say he's like most people that get shot by cops: a criminal in commission of a crime reaching for a weapon. Why does he get to be a hero? He did the wrong thing on that day and in his life. What do I care what he says or his uncle says? Maybe they should be apologizing for causing all this suffering.
I lived in Minneapolis for 10 years and know it well. Yes, the left has failed people. You say it's because the left is racist and oppressive? Huh? I don't know, I've been on the left my whole life but Im beginning to think the answer is not some abstract thing like structural racism. Yes, there's racism. This is a complicated discussion and the easiest thing to yell is structural racism. You can breath a sigh of relief and move on. I rather think it's more complicated. Probably, it's a mix of things including racism, bad leadership, failing schools, community breakdown, family disintegration, etc. I remember working with an African-American girl who told me that at 20 there was this big pressure in her family and community to have a bunch of kids out of wedlock, that she was bucking a trend just by not having kids. That's a "cultural issue" and I know it's generally forbidden to mention it. People like Glenn Loury and John McWhorter talk about it all the time so it's not just white conservatives bringing it up. I'm not leaving out racism, I'm just not so naive as to think that everyone's a victim of a system. It's just much more complicated and this drive by young people to see oppression in everything and deny progress and tear down the order of things is misguided IMO. I'm not even against aspiring to new ways of living as humans. I just want to know what it's based on. I certainly agree there's racism in policing but liberal do-good-ers in Minneapolis have failed pretty badly. For much of the time I lived in Minneapolis, there was a female black mayor. I forget her name. Should we blame her for the structural racism that's lead to such poor outcomes?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on November 28, 2021, 07:48:34 AM
Quote from: milk on November 28, 2021, 07:22:52 AM
... Im beginning to think the answer is not some abstract thing like structural racism. Yes, there's racism. This is a complicated discussion and the easiest thing to yell is structural racism. You can breath a sigh of relief and move on. I rather think it's more complicated. Probably, it's a mix of things including racism, bad leadership, failing schools, community breakdown, family disintegration, etc. I remember working with an African-American girl who told me that at 20 there was this big pressure in her family and community to have a bunch of kids out of wedlock, that she was bucking a trend just by not having kids. That's a "cultural issue" and I know it's generally forbidden to mention it. ... I'm not leaving out racism, I'm just not so naive as to think that everyone's a victim of a system. It's just much more complicated and this drive by young people to see oppression in everything and deny progress and tear down the order of things is misguided IMO.

It's not an either/or question. It's not "is everyone [PoC] the victim of a system [systemic racism] or is it more complicated. It's an and question. Everyone is a victim of systemic racism and it's more complicated. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: amw on November 28, 2021, 08:48:01 AM
Structural racism is not an abstraction, it is a material phenomenon. This term refers to when the activities of human beings organised into larger groups—which can refer to a police department, a network of friends and acquaintances, a government, an educational institution, a corporation, or larger groupings of these types of institutions working in concert—result in racism—which refers to unequal outcomes that correlate with race. (Race is an abstraction; it is a category determined by one's perceived ethnic and cultural background rather than one's material reality, in which no significant genetic differences that correlate to the phenotypic markers used as a racial heuristic have ever been found.)

All unequal outcomes are the result of oppression. This can be structural—e.g., difficulty finding and retaining employment and housing due to companies whose members either hold racist attitudes or enable them in various ways—or it can be personal—e.g., difficulty finding and retaining employment and housing due to a neglectful family, abusive partner, or any of myriad other such factors. Unequal outcomes may also result from complex chains of events: Black people had lower incomes and no access to property ownership due to racist laws; state and local governments run by racists passed laws using local property taxes to fund schools, thereby preventing black communities from having good schools; racist laws were repealed or weakened, and black home ownership increased; racist white people, no longer as represented in government, left communities that had black homeowners; property developers enabled this racism because they could profit off the now-cheap homes in formerly white areas; these low property values led schools in black areas to exist but remain underfunded; governments could not change these property tax laws because they had to enable these racist groups to survive politically. This does not mean that the unequal outcome is not systemic and intentional just because there are many moving parts. Under completely equal conditions no unequal outcomes would occur [i.e., on population-wide scales, within standard margins of error, if that wasn't obvious]. People who disagree with this are largely Malthusian/Social Darwinist types whose ideas, while largely discredited, continue to be promoted again largely as a result of structural forces (networks of friends and acquaintances centered around alumni of prestigious universities, which promote people like Charles Murray/Andrew Sullivan, whose work is otherwise unverifiable, due to their status as friends/insiders; this is the flip side of how structural institutions produce unequal negative outcomes).

There is also no such thing as a natural criminal, crime in general runs contrary to human nature, and most people who commit crimes are ones who have failed to secure legal employment etc., and again this is due to poverty (a force of structural oppression resulting from the extraction of the surplus value of labour—again, very much material rather than abstract), interpersonal oppression (most criminals have difficult family lives, untreated mental illnesses etc.), and yes racism as well. All criminals can be rehabilitated if there is political will to do so. This has been documented by psychologists and psychiatrists within the prison system for some time, with the main counterarguments resting almost entirely in the realm of pop culture and its endless output of propaganda about atavistic serial killers who cannot be reasoned with (Halloween, Friday the 13th etc) to the point where this idea of the "criminal" has become not only a fetish object in the classical sense, a noumenal entity onto which beliefs are projected, but has even become valorised (Hannibal, Dexter, etc).

Progress, by contrast, is a complete abstraction. Progress is generally identified by various manipulated metrics—e.g., economically, a claimed increase in GDP purchasing power parity, wages earned, etc., where these do not take into account alternative measures of financial stability such as cost of living; a claimed decrease in unemployment in which the percentages of the population considered employable are not disclosed. Similarly people who argue for progress in the arena of racism will point to an increase in average incomes among various minority groups, which are never indexed to present-day monetary values let alone correlated with costs of living, or to poll numbers showing long term declines in racist attitudes, when poll instruments are highly bias-prone and difficult to control for confounding variables. No proof can be made for claims regarding minority community leadership, "family disintegration", etc., although no proof is needed for these claims since people who make them are already not arguing within the arena of facts but rather that of emotional appeal to developmentally arrested Turner Diaries readers like themselves. In general, the idea that there are no systems of oppression worth talking about, and widespread social progress is an undeniable fact, is a very popular one among people who benefit from systems of oppression that have allowed them personally and their friends and family to experience social progress.

This post may not be very helpful to the person I was replying to but I hope it may be useful to others.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on November 28, 2021, 11:26:32 AM
Quote from: amw on November 28, 2021, 08:48:01 AM
Under completely equal conditions no unequal outcomes would occur.
You must be talking about something totally different here, because to me this makes no sense at all.
1) Nothing can be perfectly equal, unequal outcomes are inevitable with anything of scale or not easily calculated through numbers alone
2) If "completely equal conditions" means everything thing external is set up the same (which is impossible, though you might be able to get somewhat close), why would you think there is no difference in personal capacity between people, traits like innate intelligence (surely the mentally retarded and people with down syndrome like that are that way solely due to external oppression?), strength (men are naturally stronger because of access to gyms, or patriarchy, or access to protein?), etc.

Your statement could be true if we had two copies of the universe where everything happens identically, and you compare the two. That's about the only scenario, though.


Quote from: amw on November 28, 2021, 08:48:01 AM
There is also no such thing as a natural criminal, crime in general runs contrary to human nature, and most people who commit crimes are ones who have failed to secure legal employment etc., and again this is due to poverty (a force of structural oppression resulting from the extraction of the surplus value of labour—again, very much material rather than abstract), interpersonal oppression (most criminals have difficult family lives, untreated mental illnesses etc.), and yes racism as well. All criminals can be rehabilitated if there is political will to do so. This has been documented by psychologists and psychiatrists within the prison system for some time, with the main counterarguments resting almost entirely in the realm of pop culture and its endless output of propaganda about atavistic serial killers who cannot be reasoned with (Halloween, Friday the 13th etc) to the point where this idea of the "criminal" has become not only a fetish object in the classical sense, a noumenal entity onto which beliefs are projected, but has even become valorised (Hannibal, Dexter, etc).
This is completely ignoring the existence of psychopaths, who have a completely irregular brain which is malformed at the front. It's not only that they don't have a capacity for empathy, but many of their emotional capacities are turned down so much that they need extreme stimulation just to feel anything at all. They are totally beyond saving. The rehabilitation they show will just be them putting on their mask, sharpening their skills on how to be manipulative. And if they don't get into crime again, it might be solely due to a risk/reward calculation. If you want to consider that a sorry excuse for "saving" them, then okay. But crime is in their nature. We aren't all the same.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 28, 2021, 12:51:54 PM
Quote from: amw on November 28, 2021, 08:48:01 AM
Structural racism is not an abstraction, it is a material phenomenon. This term refers to when the activities of human beings organised into larger groups—which can refer to a police department, a network of friends and acquaintances, a government, an educational institution, a corporation, or larger groupings of these types of institutions working in concert—result in racism—which refers to unequal outcomes that correlate with race. (Race is an abstraction; it is a category determined by one's perceived ethnic and cultural background rather than one's material reality, in which no significant genetic differences that correlate to the phenotypic markers used as a racial heuristic have ever been found.)

All unequal outcomes are the result of oppression. This can be structural—e.g., difficulty finding and retaining employment and housing due to companies whose members either hold racist attitudes or enable them in various ways—or it can be personal—e.g., difficulty finding and retaining employment and housing due to a neglectful family, abusive partner, or any of myriad other such factors. Unequal outcomes may also result from complex chains of events: Black people had lower incomes and no access to property ownership due to racist laws; state and local governments run by racists passed laws using local property taxes to fund schools, thereby preventing black communities from having good schools; racist laws were repealed or weakened, and black home ownership increased; racist white people, no longer as represented in government, left communities that had black homeowners; property developers enabled this racism because they could profit off the now-cheap homes in formerly white areas; these low property values led schools in black areas to exist but remain underfunded; governments could not change these property tax laws because they had to enable these racist groups to survive politically. This does not mean that the unequal outcome is not systemic and intentional just because there are many moving parts. Under completely equal conditions no unequal outcomes would occur [i.e., on population-wide scales, within standard margins of error, if that wasn't obvious]. People who disagree with this are largely Malthusian/Social Darwinist types whose ideas, while largely discredited, continue to be promoted again largely as a result of structural forces (networks of friends and acquaintances centered around alumni of prestigious universities, which promote people like Charles Murray/Andrew Sullivan, whose work is otherwise unverifiable, due to their status as friends/insiders; this is the flip side of how structural institutions produce unequal negative outcomes).

There is also no such thing as a natural criminal, crime in general runs contrary to human nature, and most people who commit crimes are ones who have failed to secure legal employment etc., and again this is due to poverty (a force of structural oppression resulting from the extraction of the surplus value of labour—again, very much material rather than abstract), interpersonal oppression (most criminals have difficult family lives, untreated mental illnesses etc.), and yes racism as well. All criminals can be rehabilitated if there is political will to do so. This has been documented by psychologists and psychiatrists within the prison system for some time, with the main counterarguments resting almost entirely in the realm of pop culture and its endless output of propaganda about atavistic serial killers who cannot be reasoned with (Halloween, Friday the 13th etc) to the point where this idea of the "criminal" has become not only a fetish object in the classical sense, a noumenal entity onto which beliefs are projected, but has even become valorised (Hannibal, Dexter, etc).

Progress, by contrast, is a complete abstraction. Progress is generally identified by various manipulated metrics—e.g., economically, a claimed increase in GDP purchasing power parity, wages earned, etc., where these do not take into account alternative measures of financial stability such as cost of living; a claimed decrease in unemployment in which the percentages of the population considered employable are not disclosed. Similarly people who argue for progress in the arena of racism will point to an increase in average incomes among various minority groups, which are never indexed to present-day monetary values let alone correlated with costs of living, or to poll numbers showing long term declines in racist attitudes, when poll instruments are highly bias-prone and difficult to control for confounding variables. No proof can be made for claims regarding minority community leadership, "family disintegration", etc., although no proof is needed for these claims since people who make them are already not arguing within the arena of facts but rather that of emotional appeal to developmentally arrested Turner Diaries readers like themselves. In general, the idea that there are no systems of oppression worth talking about, and widespread social progress is an undeniable fact, is a very popular one among people who benefit from systems of oppression that have allowed them personally and their friends and family to experience social progress.

This post may not be very helpful to the person I was replying to but I hope it may be useful to others.

Excellent post.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on November 28, 2021, 01:01:36 PM
Quote from: amw on November 28, 2021, 08:48:01 AM
Structural racism is not an abstraction, it is a material phenomenon. This term refers to when the activities of human beings organised into larger groups—which can refer to a police department, a network of friends and acquaintances, a government, an educational institution, a corporation, or larger groupings of these types of institutions working in concert—result in racism—which refers to unequal outcomes that correlate with race. (Race is an abstraction; it is a category determined by one's perceived ethnic and cultural background rather than one's material reality, in which no significant genetic differences that correlate to the phenotypic markers used as a racial heuristic have ever been found.)

No, races are configurations of traits -- that is, single "phenotypic markers" indeed, appear in varying degrees everywhere but the combinations are what defines race for practical purpose.

So for example forensic anthropologists routinely attempt to identify race for from skeletal remains because it is practically useful for discovering the identities of individuals.  Of course identifications can be confounded by persons of mixed race.

The idea that race doesn't exist is a "liberal", politically correct ideology that isn't consistent with reality.

Quote from: amw on November 28, 2021, 08:48:01 AM
All unequal outcomes are the result of oppression.

Balderdash:  oppression is only one factor in unequal outcomes.  Natural ability is obviously a factor;  and it nothing else where significant, there is the factor of luck.  Strict equality of outcome would have to be enforced by draconian measures.

Quote from: amw on November 28, 2021, 08:48:01 AM
There is also no such thing as a natural criminal, crime in general runs contrary to human nature ...

That peoples are naturally good was a tenet of the Stoic philosophers, but I don't belief it.  Personally I believe that all human beings have tendencies to both selfishness and altruism.   And I happen to believe both are traits were and are necessary to the survival human beings as species..  But individuals one one trait or the other can predominate.  Granted, circumstance may drive a typical individual one way or the other.

It seems that some individuals are almost entirely selfish in their orientation;  in its extreme it's clearly pathological.  How else do we explain malignant narcissists like Donald Trump?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 28, 2021, 01:03:34 PM
Quote from: amw on November 28, 2021, 08:48:01 AM

All unequal outcomes are the result of oppression.

No. Obviously no. This is akin to a religious belief.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: amw on November 28, 2021, 03:47:12 PM
Individual differences in skill, luck and circumstance average out very quickly in any population size exceeding a few hundred individuals; any remaining between-population differences must be ascribed to some structural difference.

(Not all such differences will be intentional. If you took completely random groups of twenty thousand one-year-old babies and twenty thousand adults, and observed that the sample of adults scored significantly higher on cognitive ability tests, not many conclusions could be drawn from such an observation as your group selection has already controlled for at least two of the most relevant variables. Whereas within the sample of adults, for the same cognitive ability test, a multivariate analysis of their demographic characteristics might reveal the most salient factors correlating with cognitive score to be level of education, personal income, parents' income, presence/absence of mental health conditions, diet, exposure to air/water pollution, for example. All of these factors are, or can be, results of intentional, goal-directed human activity. [Mental health conditions can be natural, i.e., a chemical imbalance/developmental disability, but are usually also partly & sometimes wholly anthropogenic, i.e., with trauma, upbringing, stress, social milieu, etc. playing a role.])
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on November 29, 2021, 05:30:27 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on November 28, 2021, 01:01:36 PMBalderdash:  oppression is only one factor in unequal outcomes.  Natural ability is obviously a factor;  and it nothing else where significant, there is the factor of luck.  Strict equality of outcome would have to be enforced by draconian measures.

I don't think amw means that each individual would be equally successful. I think amw means that each race/ethnic group would be equally successful in a statistical sense, given equal treatment by the society. I agree with this, except for the slight reservation that some cultures might emphasize values which might lead to more material success, compared with other cultures. But in the U.S. cultures of different races are strongly shaped by official and unofficial discrimination.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on November 29, 2021, 05:49:37 AM
Quote from: amw on November 28, 2021, 03:47:12 PM
Individual differences in skill, luck and circumstance average out very quickly in any population size exceeding a few hundred individuals; any remaining between-population differences must be ascribed to some structural difference.

(Not all such differences will be intentional. If you took completely random groups of twenty thousand one-year-old babies and twenty thousand adults, and observed that the sample of adults scored significantly higher on cognitive ability tests, not many conclusions could be drawn from such an observation as your group selection has already controlled for at least two of the most relevant variables. Whereas within the sample of adults, for the same cognitive ability test, a multivariate analysis of their demographic characteristics might reveal the most salient factors correlating with cognitive score to be level of education, personal income, parents' income, presence/absence of mental health conditions, diet, exposure to air/water pollution, for example. All of these factors are, or can be, results of intentional, goal-directed human activity. [Mental health conditions can be natural, i.e., a chemical imbalance/developmental disability, but are usually also partly & sometimes wholly anthropogenic, i.e., with trauma, upbringing, stress, social milieu, etc. playing a role.])

Please understand that, earlier above, I was objecting to a few categorical statements you made.

I certainly don't reject that systemic racism exists in the USA and elsewhere.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on November 29, 2021, 06:33:12 PM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on November 29, 2021, 05:30:27 AM
I think amw means that each race/ethnic group would be equally successful in a statistical sense, given equal treatment by the society. I agree with this, except for the slight reservation that some cultures might emphasize values which might lead to more material success, compared with other cultures. But in the U.S. cultures of different races are strongly shaped by official and unofficial discrimination.
So why do people think it's so taboo to discuss even the possibility of differences in innate traits like average IQ in races? IMO what matters most about it is one's attitude towards it. If there is a difference, you can just acknowledge it and move on. Don't make it into a big deal.

Perhaps it is a fault of people that put the importance of the group over the individual, and obsess over it? (and they are scared that if they think about it too much, that they'll become racist?)

Just because the racial group I belong to isn't #1 in average IQ (#1 being east Asians), doesn't mean anything at all. Who cares. All of us are individuals, we're not just members of a race, so we can all be respectfully treated regardless.

I do agree the cultural factor is also important, as you noted. Cultural values of work ethic are super important. I've sort of concluded that there are three things, anyways, that are most important for what is regarded as "success"- 1) luck (especially in regards to inheriting wealth), 2) IQ, 3) Work ethic. Though all three do come down to luck in the end.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 30, 2021, 05:13:09 AM
Quote from: greg on November 29, 2021, 06:33:12 PM
So why do people think it's so taboo to discuss even the possibility of differences in innate traits like average IQ in races? IMO what matters most about it is one's attitude towards it. If there is a difference, you can just acknowledge it and move on. Don't make it into a big deal.

Perhaps it is a fault of people that put the importance of the group over the individual, and obsess over it? (and they are scared that if they think about it too much, that they'll become racist?)

Just because the racial group I belong to isn't #1 in average IQ (#1 being east Asians), doesn't mean anything at all. Who cares. All of us are individuals, we're not just members of a race, so we can all be respectfully treated regardless.

I do agree the cultural factor is also important, as you noted. Cultural values of work ethic are super important. I've sort of concluded that there are three things, anyways, that are most important for what is regarded as "success"- 1) luck (especially in regards to inheriting wealth), 2) IQ, 3) Work ethic. Though all three do come down to luck in the end.
it's a very uncomfortable topic. There are differences in height and eye sight between ethnic groups. Intelligence may be a much more complicated thing to measure and not worth (I hope/think) paying attention to. I do think that the ideology that all differences in outcomes come from oppression will lead to terrible policies which will make most everything worse. I also think environmental factors are a big part of the deal but that doesn't mean oppression necessarily. Obviously there's a legacy of unfairness to acknowledge and deal with. But treating people as mainly identities is a disaster politically and policy-wise. I just think we will never convince some people of this. I don't want to ever be closed-minded about things though so where there's a good reason to focus on identity I'd like to know where we should.
ETA: I think all this focus on identities is an invitation to the right wing and is courting disaster. The left came out with a shocker over the last few years: whiteness is a kind of indelible thing. It's almost a mirror of the racist right. Now we're getting this ethnic nationalism from the right too. The left and right are saying liberalism doesn't work; we need a new system based on identity-oppression (i.e. critical theories from the left) or we need to base society on religious or ethnic nationalism (right). This is a huge danger to society.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on November 30, 2021, 06:29:29 AM
Quote from: milk on November 30, 2021, 05:13:09 AM
it's a very uncomfortable topic.
It sure is. Not something to ever bring up randomly with no context.  :D
I wish people could acknowledge it as a possible thing, but then not care at all because retards could make it could lead to very dark paths that I hope we never have to go through.


Quote from: milk on November 30, 2021, 05:13:09 AM
it's a very uncomfortable topic. There are differences in height and eye sight between ethnic groups. Intelligence may be a much more complicated thing to measure and not worth (I hope/think) paying attention to. I do think that the ideology that all differences in outcomes come from oppression will lead to terrible policies which will make most everything worse. I also think environmental factors are a big part of the deal but that doesn't mean oppression necessarily. Obviously there's a legacy of unfairness to acknowledge and deal with. But treating people as mainly identities is a disaster politically and policy-wise. I just think we will never convince some people of this. I don't want to ever be closed-minded about things though so where there's a good reason to focus on identity I'd like to know where we should.
ETA: I think all this focus on identities is an invitation to the right wing and is courting disaster. The left came out with a shocker over the last few years: whiteness is a kind of indelible thing. It's almost a mirror of the racist right. Now we're getting this ethnic nationalism from the right too. The left and right are saying liberalism doesn't work; we need a new system based on identity-oppression (i.e. critical theories from the left) or we need to base society on religious or ethnic nationalism (right). This is a huge danger to society.
Yeah, I agree with all of this.
Also, to the people that get into identity politics, they need to remember that if they are being treated as a member of a group, then they will be seen as disposable, and not treated as a full individual. Their choice, I guess.
Probably a cause of this is some breakdown of communities and religion in modern society. Many lost people out there.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 30, 2021, 07:03:13 AM
Quote from: greg on November 30, 2021, 06:29:29 AM
Also, to the people that get into identity politics, they need to remember that if they are being treated as a member of a group, then they will be seen as disposable, and not treated as a full individual. Their choice, I guess.
Glenn Loury, a black economist at Brown university, had this interesting response when his minority students complained that there aren't enough professors or other students that "look like them." He said, "they're human beings. They DO look like you."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on November 30, 2021, 07:30:09 AM
Quote from: milk on November 30, 2021, 07:03:13 AM
Glenn Loury, a black economist at Brown university, had this interesting response when his minority students complained that there aren't enough professors or other students that "look like them." He said, "they're human beings. They DO look like you."
Lol! I want to give this guy a high five.

That reminds me of one of the things I read in a list of what is regarded as "white privilege," some white guy saying that he acknowledges the "privilege that movies/tv represents his race as the majority." But why would this matter? Is it an inability to empathize with people that don't look like themselves? (stuff like this makes me suspect a lot of woke people are just closeted racists)

I seriously cannot understand caring so much to be around people that look just like you, wanting to fit in so much. So much that they can't even watch a movie without feeling out of place.  ???

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on November 30, 2021, 07:34:31 AM
Quote from: greg on November 30, 2021, 07:30:09 AMI seriously cannot understand caring so much to be around people that look just like you, wanting to fit in so much. So much that they can't even watch a movie without feeling out of place.  ???

Obviously you can't imagine the challenges faced by people other than yourself.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 30, 2021, 07:38:27 AM
Opinion: Panicked Democrats are ready to shove Biden aside. Again.

By Matt Bai
Contributing columnist

Yesterday at 8:00 a.m. EST

Ten months into President Biden's term, panicky Democrats have already begun to speculate on who might take his place on the ticket in 2024, despite Biden's assurances that he intends to stand for reelection.

A Post story last weekend contained this remarkable nugget: "One Democrat involved in campaigns said they couldn't think of a single person they had spoken to in the last month who considers the possibility of Biden running again to be a real one."

Maybe so. But if there's one Democrat in Washington who isn't feeling panicky right now, I'm betting it's the president himself.

For Biden, being written off as too old and out of his depth isn't exactly a gut punch. It's more like another day in the last 30 years.

In 1987, Biden's first presidential campaign came crashing down in a matter of days amid charges of plagiarism. At that moment, Biden was not quite 45 and had just emerged as one of the brightest hopes of his generation. Almost overnight, he became a casualty of the brand-new character wars, his national ambitions declared dead by the entire media-political class.

If there was any doubt that Biden's career had been wiped away, the following year he almost literally died from a sudden brain aneurysm. Biden recovered and kept at it.

In 2007, when Biden again decided to seek the presidency, the consensus was that his time had passed — and that Biden must be the only Democrat in Washington who didn't know it.

Biden heard the laughter of all the insiders and pundits who said he was over the hill, out of step, comically long-winded. He ended up with the vice presidency.

Eight years later, when Biden — now 73 — considered a third presidential run, the overwhelming sentiment within the party was that Hillary Clinton, and not Biden, was Barack Obama's best and likeliest successor.

For the third time in his career, all the smart Democrats praised Biden's service and sent him off into the political sunset. Even most of his closest advisers assumed he was through.

Four years later, he was back, paddling headlong against the ideological current in his party. And again, after he got blasted in Iowa and New Hampshire, everyone who knew anything dismissed Biden as too old and too centrist, not to mention too White and male.

We were wrong. Ploddingly, haltingly, serenely, Biden persevered and won.

So you can imagine how Biden feels now, when he sees these polls that show his approval ratings bobbing around the 40 percent mark and when he hears about all these Democrats — including a few in his own administration — angling to fill the vacuum once he finally realizes he must get out of the way.

You can see him chuckling to himself, the way he sometimes does when a reporter asks some shallow question he's answered 2,000 times in his life. Keep declaring me finished, Biden must be thinking. Time will decide.

There's a danger in this, of course. Just because you've always defied the groupthink doesn't mean you'll do it again — especially if all that perspective fills you with a kind of unexamined confidence.

Whatever his comfort as a No. 2, Biden hasn't yet adjusted to being the guy who sets the agenda. One hopes that his unsteady performance in trying to pass a social spending bill — adrift and indecisive, too deferential toward the same left flank of his party that he soundly defeated in last year's primaries — will serve as a turning point rather than a template for the rest of his presidency.

Biden's age is a legitimate problem [he might have said point, instead, but let it go—kh] too. He can shrug it off if he wants (and he was lucky to get away with it during a campaign that was largely conducted by Zoom), but running for reelection at 81 would be asking a lot of voters, and his party deserves to see a little more assertiveness in the face of mounting crises.

But what Biden knows, after three-plus decades of being politically left for dead, is that nothing's over just because a bunch of unnamed staffers who spend too much time reading polls say it's over. He knows from experience that the more monolithic and reflexive the popular wisdom, the more likely it will be proved wrong.

Does Biden run again? Personally, I've always thought he was most likely a one-term, stabilizing president, and I don't really believe he has made up his mind to seek another term.

But it's early yet, and I'm pretty sure Biden won't be spooked into accepting everybody else's idea of political reality. If there's any one lesson of his political life, it's that realities usually change.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 30, 2021, 07:39:38 AM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on November 30, 2021, 07:34:31 AM
Obviously you can't imagine the challenges faced by people other than yourself.

Add to that his lack of interest in them.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 30, 2021, 10:18:34 AM
Former Trump aide Mark Meadows cooperating with House Jan. 6 panel
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on November 30, 2021, 02:41:54 PM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on November 30, 2021, 07:34:31 AM
Obviously you can't imagine the challenges faced by people other than yourself.
I've not once thought when watching an Asian movie, for example, "oh, they should be more inclusive of white people because I'm white." The only demographic I'm glad to see on screen are pretty ladies.

Mostly I watch anime, and they aren't any race. It wouldn't change at all if the majority of Hollywood movies consisted of some other race, RACE IS NOT THAT IMPORTANT, and if you consider it that important, then I have bad news for you.

Anyone who has that sort of problem must be suffering from crippling loneliness or something. Seriously, at that point people should get psychological help, regardless which race they are, it's kind of pathetic tbh.



Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 30, 2021, 07:39:38 AM
Add to that his lack of interest in them.
Going against your ideology is not an excuse for these types comments.

edit:
What you're doing is expanding the scope of my comment and then aiming it at me as a personal attack, in order to trying to discredit what I'm saying. Like I must have some sort of personal defect, so what I'm saying is invalid.

For one, although it's prefaced with "I think," it doesn't mean mean the post is about me, it's about what I'm talking about. But with this post you make it about me. Making me have to defend myself yet again.

So where the hell were you during the times in my life when I had a friend that reported to me instances of being verbally harassed for the color of their skin, and I supported them in their actions of standing up for themselves?

So "lack of interest," huh?

Let's proceed back to the topic, as mentioned before, instead of making it about me.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 30, 2021, 05:54:29 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 30, 2021, 07:39:38 AM
Add to that his lack of interest in them.
this works both ways. In the privilege olympics, you DO have to disregard the pain of others. Fat ugly white dudes aren't worth much. Ugly people in general. Old white women are Karen-s and anyone named Karen, young or old, can live as pariahs. You're making an accusation but are you boasting about your own empathy in comparison? Or should we not take it that way? I do agree that inclusion is important. I can imagine what it's like to be an outsider though I can't imagine what it's like to be in Auschwitz in 1943. I can try. But Loury has a point for us white liberals. He doesn't want patronizing liberal virtue. He says he's arguing for the soul of his country and the dignity of his people. It's his country too and he makes the argument that the fact that the human experience is universal can get lost in all this, especially if we're talking about an ideology that specifically says it isn't.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 30, 2021, 05:58:40 PM
Quote from: milk on November 30, 2021, 05:54:29 PM
this works both ways. In the privilege olympics, you DO have to disregard the pain of others. Fat ugly white dudes aren't worth much. Ugly people in general. Old white women are Karen-s and anyone named Karen, young or old, can live as pariahs. You're making an accusation but are you boasting about your own empathy in comparison? Or should we not take it that way? I do agree that inclusion is important. I can imagine what it's like to be an outsider though I can't imagine what it's like to be in Auschwitz in 1943. I can try. But Loury has a point for us white liberals. He doesn't want patronizing liberal virtue. He says he's arguing for the soul of his country and the dignity of his people. It's his country too and he makes the argument that the fact that the human experience is universal can get lost in all this, especially if we're talking about an ideology that specifically says it isn't.

I'm talking straightforward compassion. I've no interest in politicizing that.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on November 30, 2021, 06:00:41 PM
Someone who can only feel compassion for those like himself, has no compassion.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on November 30, 2021, 06:05:39 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 30, 2021, 06:00:41 PM
Someone who can only feel compassion for those like himself, has no compassion.
so it sounds like you agree with Loury.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 01, 2021, 09:06:34 AM
If my hopes on that score were not by now worn down, I might say: Is an end to the bullshittery in sight?

Opinion: Trump's stonewalling on the Jan. 6 investigation is crumbling (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/12/01/bad-day-trump-stonewalling-good-day-jan-6-committee/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on December 01, 2021, 10:04:50 AM
This sums up everything politics 100%, concisely articulating my thoughts better than I ever could have.

(https://scontent-hou1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/260173562_1251471875372283_285786536243468913_n.jpg?_nc_cat=107&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=Fx5Lt92E6nYAX_B-IXT&_nc_ht=scontent-hou1-1.xx&oh=13ae6ac3ac4add0985ceb78379da87ec&oe=61ACFCD2)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 01, 2021, 12:14:04 PM
Not a whack-job, mind you:

Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker will not seek reelection

By Emma Platoff and Matt Stout Globe Staff, Updated December 1, 2021, 1 hour ago

Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker, the Republican who maintained the enduring support of his blue-state constituents through boom times, the Trump presidency, and the COVID-19 pandemic, will not seek a third term in 2022, he said Wednesday.

A moderate who has kept his distance from the controversies of the national Republican Party and cast himself as a thrifty and thoughtful manager, Baker, 65, would have entered the race as its front-runner. With less than a year before Election Day, Baker's choice leaves the race wide open. And it means he will forgo a shot at history: No Massachusetts governor has served three consecutive four-year terms.

Another campaign would have been "a distraction" at a time when he's focused on steering the state through the pandemic, Baker said Wednesday in a joint statement with Lieutenant Governor Karyn Polito.

"We want to focus on recovery, not on the grudge matches political campaigns can devolve into," Baker and Polito said.

Polito also will not seek reelection, they said in the statement, and an adviser said she will not run for governor in 2022.

For months, the question of whether Baker would seek reelection has been Massachusetts' political elephant in the room, with some donors and potential candidates waiting to see what he'd do before making their own intentions clear. Baker, who could not avoid the question in media interviews and at unrelated appearances, towed a careful, consistent line: He was discussing the matter with his family and would share his decision soon — just as soon as he'd made it.

That wasn't just politicking: Baker was actively grappling with whether to run again, and his decision was made only recently, people close to the governor said. At times, advisers even began to sketch out how they would approach a reelection announcement. As recently as last Tuesday, Baker held a fundraiser at Davio's restaurant in the Seaport, pulling in campaign cash ahead of the Thanksgiving holiday.

But over the weekend, Baker huddled with his family, and it was then that he decided not to pursue another campaign, according to two people familiar with Baker's thinking.

His family was a driving factor, not any fear that he couldn't win another term, said someone familiar with Baker's thinking.

"He put his family first," said another person with knowledge of the discussions.

Baker told a small circle of close aides on Monday that he would not seek another term; two days later, he announced it publicly.

In their statement Wednesday, the two Republicans nodded to the importance of spending time with family and friends, a priority they said the pandemic has highlighted.

"Done right, these jobs require an extraordinary amount of time and attention, and we love doing them," Baker and Polito said. "But we both want to be there with Lauren and Steve and our children for the moments, big and small, that our families will experience going forward."

With less than a year before Election Day, Baker's choice leaves the race wide open, and it may make way for more major candidates than the three Democrats and one Republican who already have jumped into the gubernatorial race. The state's political klieg lights will shine most brightly on Attorney General Maura Healey, a Democrat.

Baker allies frame his tenure as a success that would have earned him another term. They praise him for his responsiveness to local needs and willingness to compromise with Democrats, who dominate the Legislature.

While he has led the state to great economic heights, longstanding racial inequities persist, disparities that the announced Democratic contenders — state Senator Sonia Chang-Díaz, former state senator Ben Downing, and Harvard professor Danielle Allen — have highlighted.

Critics cast Baker as an incrementalist who has lacked a vision equal to the gnawing problems in the state, a plodding bureaucrat without the will to harness Massachusetts' vast resources — and, worst of all, a leader whose management failures have led to preventable death. They cite a tragedy at the Holyoke Soldiers' Home — where a COVID-19 outbreak killed 76 veterans, one of the highest death tolls of any senior-care facility in the country — as evidence that a governor who pitches himself as an able manager has at times mismanaged, with devastating results.

They also point to the scandal at the state Registry of Motor Vehicles, where officials had ignored tens of thousands of alerts that Massachusetts drivers had broken driving laws, including by driving drunk, in other states. Baker said he had not known about the problem before a deadly 2019 crash in New Hampshire pushed it into public view.

For his part, the governor has long projected a steady, even keel, avoiding partisan spitting matches and distancing himself from controversial members of his party, including former president Donald Trump. A baseball cap spotted in his office over the years, which reads "JUST FIX IT," seems to neatly sum up his pragmatic approach.

Veto-proof Democratic majorities in both chambers of the Legislature have forced him to reach across the aisle, his politics often hewing closer to the centrist Democratic leanings of the Massachusetts House than the conservative planks of his own state party's platform.

Baker would have been a formidable opponent for the major contenders who have so far declared their candidacies. Polls during his tenure have found that Baker is more popular with Massachusetts Democrats and independents than with Republicans, and his overall approval ratings make him the envy of most of his 49 colleagues across the United States.

Under Baker, polling has consistently shown residents believe Massachusetts is headed in the right direction. Before the pandemic, the state economy was in good shape, with unemployment under 3 percent. And Baker has been credited with improving some of the state's most beleaguered agencies, including reducing wait times at the RMV and lowering caseloads at the Department of Children and Families, which nonetheless has struggled this year to quickly find enough foster homes for children in its care.

Baker's second term has been upended by the pandemic, which hit Massachusetts earlier than much of the rest of the country, spreading rapidly after such events as a late February 2020 Biogen conference[emphasis mine, the Biogen conference at the Long Wharf Marriott was of course COVID Ground Zero here in the states—kh]. After Baker declared a state of emergency that spring, the state's unemployment rate shot above 16 percent. It has declined significantly in the last few months, though it remains above its pre-pandemic low. Now, though the state is a national leader in vaccination rates, Massachusetts still has one of the country's higher death rates from COVID.

Baker has been attacked from all sides for his handling of the pandemic — those on the right who said he did too much to lock the state down, those on the left who said he did too little — and there have been occasional bristly moments with Democratic legislative leaders, notably earlier this year, when limited doses of the vaccine and a flubbed website earned Baker perhaps his most biting criticism since taking office.

But he has for the most part maintained his good standing in the eyes of the vast majority of voters, and after some early hiccups, the state improved its vaccine rollout, quieting some of the governor's harshest critics.

"You're doing a hell of a job," President Biden told Baker in May.

A graduate of Harvard College and Northwestern's business school, Baker was a wunderkind secretary of health and human services and later budget chief in the William F. Weld Cabinet, where Weld called him the administration's "heart and soul."

He left state government after eight years and joined Harvard Pilgrim Health Care as president and CEO in 1999. Soon after he took charge, the insurer was in such a catastrophic financial situation it was put into state receivership. But Baker helped nurse it back to fiscal health and made it the top-rated insurer in the country.

He left the private sector to seek the governor's office for the first time in 2010, the same year the stick-it-to-the-establishment Tea Party movement helped Republicans take control of the US House of Representatives. In that gubernatorial race, he struck a now-unfamiliar angry tone, asking voters whether they'd "had enough" of incumbent Deval Patrick.

They hadn't; Patrick won.

But Baker rebounded from the loss, rebranding himself as a cheerier candidate who showed up to listen. In 2014, pitching the campaign slogan, "Let's be Great, Massachusetts!" he squeaked into office with 40,000 more votes than Democrat Martha Coakley, the slimmest margin in decades.

Shortly after taking office in 2015, Baker led the state through a historic series of snowstorms, making himself a consistent presence in the news and scoring early political points. His approval ratings rose, reaching 70 percent that April, and have rarely flagged since.

He sailed to reelection in 2018, easily beating Democrat Jay Gonzalez, who unsuccessfully tried to tie Baker to Trump. Gonzalez, like the 2022 Democratic hopefuls, called Baker a "status quo governor" who lacked the vision to push the state to its full potential. But voters, overwhelmingly approving of the state's direction, delivered Baker and Polito a decisive mandate, with 67 percent of the vote.

During his two terms, Baker has had opportunities and enjoyed success previous governors did not. Baker has reshaped the state's Supreme Judicial Court, having had the chance to appoint all seven of its justices. In making selections, Baker prioritized diversity and life experience, molding what legal experts have described as a centrist court reflective of his own pragmatic approach.

He has made it a priority to address the opioid epidemic and pushed to bring the nation's first large-scale offshore wind farm to federal waters south of Martha's Vineyard. Baker also made major changes lauded by advocates at Bridgewater State Hospital, where prison guards had used seclusion and restraints at more than 100 times the rate of other state mental health facilities.

Another achievement was a law that created one of the nation's most far-reaching efforts to reduce the planet-warming carbon emissions that cause climate change. Earlier this year, after vetoing an initial bill, Baker signed a law that requires Massachusetts to reduce its carbon emissions by at least 50 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, 75 percent below those levels by 2040, and achieve "net zero" emissions by 2050.

Under Baker's tenure, the state also has seen horrific failures, including during the pandemic.

A Boston Globe Spotlight Team investigation found that Baker and a top deputy played crucial roles in the lead-up to the tragedy at the Holyoke Soldiers' Home, where 76 veterans died. Bennett Walsh, who the Globe found was an unqualified, politically connected hire to head the facility, was indicted on criminal neglect charges for his role in the deadly outbreak, as was former medical director David Clinton. Both pleaded not guilty and in November, a Hampden County judge dismissed all criminal charges. Baker has downplayed his role in hiring Walsh, saying initially that he never interviewed him for the position, and then reversing himself: "I forgot," he said.

Baker came into office at a particularly challenging time for the state's child welfare agency, which was reeling from the case of Jeremiah Oliver, a toddler who was found dead on the side of a highway, months after state workers who were monitoring his parents had lost track of him. During Baker's second term, the agency's budget had grown by hundreds of millions of dollars and caseloads had dropped. Still, especially as caseworkers emerge from the pandemic, the agency is stressed as perhaps never before, struggling to find placements for at-risk kids.

Before he made his gubernatorial decision, Baker already had several people hoping to succeed him.

Each of the three Democrats who have declared for governor has their strengths — Allen, the Harvard professor, sterling academic credentials; Downing, the former lawmaker, a base in Western Massachusetts; Chang-Díaz, who serves in the Massachusetts Senate, the boisterous support of hyper-engaged progressive activists — but none enjoys the name recognition of another potential entrant.

Healey, who was first elected attorney general in 2014, has a nearly $3.3 million war chest and a national reputation that would make her a formidable candidate.

Healey has said "we'll know more in the fall" about her future political moves, but has yet to publicly detail her plans.

Polito, 55, had been widely seen as a successor to Baker, though she has a more conservative bent than the incumbent. Over the past few months, she and Baker had held numerous fund-raisers across the state. As of the end of October, she had $2.3 million in her political campaign account.

On the Republican side, conservative Geoff Diehl, a former state lawmaker who lost a Senate bid to Elizabeth Warren in 2018 and has been critical of the governor, declared well before Baker's decision.

Diehl has support in more conservative pockets of the party, and the endorsement of Trump[Overall, in Mass. Trump's endorsement is a liability—kh], but even if he secures the GOP nomination, he faces longshot odds in blue Massachusetts. Trump has had harsh words for Baker in the past, calling him a "RINO" — Republican in name only — and some in the GOP anticipated he might even travel to Massachusetts to campaign against Baker in the primary.

In the end, the moderate throughline that vaulted Baker to power in a state dominated by Democrats — and earned him the former president's ire — may be his most lasting legacy. In their joint statement, Baker and Polito listed off numerous accomplishments of their two terms, but also preached the power of their "bipartisan approach, where we listen as much as we talk, where we focus our energies on finding areas of agreement and not disagreement, and where we avoid the public sniping and grandstanding that defines much of our political discourse."

It's a strategy for which Baker hopes to be remembered.

In December of 2018, as he was finishing his first term, the governor was asked what he hoped his political exit story would say, to fill in the blank of a sentence that began, "Charles Duane Baker Jr., who . . ."

Baker listed several key efforts including fighting the opioid epidemic and investing in energy and transportation.

He also reflected on a broader success. "And who demonstrated time and time again that it's possible in politics and in public life to find common ground and to avoid the cheap nitpicking that so dominates partisan politics."

Baker paused for a moment, then asked: "How's that?"
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 01, 2021, 01:52:47 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 01, 2021, 09:06:34 AM
If my hopes on that score were not by now worn down, I might say: Is an end to the bullshittery in sight?

Opinion: Trump's stonewalling on the Jan. 6 investigation is crumbling (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/12/01/bad-day-trump-stonewalling-good-day-jan-6-committee/)

No way. It's patently obvious that Cheeto Mussolini merely has to stall until the 2022 midterms, after which GOP-controlled Congress will shitcan the probe. And that'll be easy.

I'm serious. Not happy about it, but it's inevitable IMO.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 01, 2021, 02:01:49 PM
Quote from: T. D. on December 01, 2021, 01:52:47 PM
No way. It's patently obvious that Cheeto Mussolini merely has to stall until the 2022 midterms, after which GOP-controlled Congress will shitcan the probe. And that'll be easy.

I'm serious. Not happy about it, but it's inevitable IMO.

Sad to relate, I cannot say you're wrong.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on December 01, 2021, 06:04:12 PM
Quote from: T. D. on December 01, 2021, 01:52:47 PM
No way. It's patently obvious that Cheeto Mussolini merely has to stall until the 2022 midterms, after which GOP-controlled Congress will shitcan the probe. And that'll be easy.

I'm serious. Not happy about it, but it's inevitable IMO.
this is coming and it's infuriating. They'd better get something done before they're kicked out. How about a SCOTUS too? What are Dems waiting for?
But I can even imagine someone worse than Trum in 2024. Yikes.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 01, 2021, 06:14:05 PM
Quote from: milk on December 01, 2021, 06:04:12 PM
But I can even imagine someone worse than Trum in 2024. Yikes.

I know it's possible, but I shrink from considering it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on December 01, 2021, 06:18:24 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 01, 2021, 06:14:05 PM
I know it's possible, but I shrink from considering it.
Trump is such a big sideshow. You know why Anne Coulter turned on him? Because she said he was too stupid to fulfill his promises. Imagine if she gets her way. Imagine a savvier more disciplined politician with the same general agenda as trump's crowd? I don't have the link now, but David Brooks recently wrote about a scarier more nationalistic right wing. Yikes!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 01, 2021, 06:19:12 PM
Quote from: milk on December 01, 2021, 06:04:12 PM
this is coming and it's infuriating. They'd better get something done before they're kicked out. How about a SCOTUS too? What are Dems waiting for?
But I can even imagine someone worse than Trum[p] in 2024. Yikes.

If you followed the Steve Bannon indictment, he laughed at that s**t, believing full well in the scenario I referred to.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on December 01, 2021, 06:30:34 PM
Quote from: milk on December 01, 2021, 06:04:12 PM
this is coming and it's infuriating. They'd better get something done before they're kicked out. How about a SCOTUS too? What are Dems waiting for?
But I can even imagine someone worse than Trum in 2024. Yikes.

They would need to kill the filibuster. Which they can't do, since it and Biden's vetos may be the only blocking weapons they have after the midterms.
(Yes I realize the Turtle may well do that if/when he's back as Majority Leader. But there's no need to disarm oneself just because the enemy will try to disarm you.)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on December 02, 2021, 02:05:21 PM
https://www.theatlantic.com/culture/archive/2021/12/mel-gibson-anti-semitism/620873/ (https://www.theatlantic.com/culture/archive/2021/12/mel-gibson-anti-semitism/620873/)
Cancel Mel Gibson
Why is Hollywood still hiring this raging anti-Semite?

The dude from West Wing wrote this: Joshua Malina.

I think the discussion of "cancel culture" is impoverished. The people, like me, who worry there is a "there" there, aren't saying it's OK to use slurs and express bigotry against anyone or that people haven't legitimately been affected when they transgressed. Anyway, I see what Malina is saying. There's a difference between saying "Judaism isn't true" and "Jews run the world." You're free to attack the ideas in Judaism, I hope. When Gibson was in the back of a police car in 2006 talking to a Jewish officer, perhaps he should have limited himself to critiquing Talmudic theology. Just saying.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on December 02, 2021, 06:58:49 PM
Quote from: milk on December 02, 2021, 02:05:21 PM
https://www.theatlantic.com/culture/archive/2021/12/mel-gibson-anti-semitism/620873/ (https://www.theatlantic.com/culture/archive/2021/12/mel-gibson-anti-semitism/620873/)
Cancel Mel Gibson
Why is Hollywood still hiring this raging anti-Semite?

The dude from West Wing wrote this: Joshua Malina.

Anyway, I see what Malina is saying. There's a difference between saying "Judaism isn't true" and "Jews run the world." You're free to attack the ideas in Judaism, I hope.

That's not what Malina is saying. Did you read beyond the headline?

And: "attack"?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on December 03, 2021, 03:32:28 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on December 02, 2021, 06:58:49 PM
That's not what Malina is saying. Did you read beyond the headline?

And: "attack"?
That's what I'm saying about the article dude. My opinion is that Malina is right to question why someone that expresses hate directly is being employed this way. I don't think this is what "cancel culture is," which Malina is NOT addressing. I am adding my comment on it. It's true that I wasn't clear but don't be a goof. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on December 03, 2021, 03:52:34 AM
Quote from: milk on December 02, 2021, 02:05:21 PM
https://www.theatlantic.com/culture/archive/2021/12/mel-gibson-anti-semitism/620873/ (https://www.theatlantic.com/culture/archive/2021/12/mel-gibson-anti-semitism/620873/)
Cancel Mel Gibson
Why is Hollywood still hiring this raging anti-Semite?

The dude from West Wing wrote this: Joshua Malina.

I think the discussion of "cancel culture" is impoverished. The people, like me, who worry there is a "there" there, aren't saying it's OK to use slurs and express bigotry against anyone or that people haven't legitimately been affected when they transgressed. Anyway, I see what Malina is saying. There's a difference between saying "Judaism isn't true" and "Jews run the world." You're free to attack the ideas in Judaism, I hope. When Gibson was in the back of a police car in 2006 talking to a Jewish officer, perhaps he should have limited himself to critiquing Talmudic theology. Just saying.

Wow!!  Practically speaking, can one criticize Judaism without being anti-Semitic?

Well it might depend on your basis for criticizing Judaism.  If you're saying Judaism is deficient because it doesn't acknowledge Jesus as divine, (i.e. your criticism is based on religious bias), then I suppose it's possible you're a religious bigot without being anti-Semitic.

If you are an atheist, agnostic, or otherwise distain religious doctrine or religious organization, then I suppose you can criticize Judaism but you are likely to criticize most religions at the same time -- maybe others much more than Judaism.

If you are in the second category, above, the Christian religion should probably highest on you bad guy list on account of its heavy emphasis on theological, (trinitarian, Christological), doctrine and the authoritarian organization of the Roman Catholic Church.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on December 03, 2021, 05:37:30 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on December 03, 2021, 03:52:34 AM
Wow!!  Practically speaking, can one criticize Judaism without being anti-Semitic?

Well it might depend on your basis for criticizing Judaism.  If you're saying Judaism is deficient because it doesn't acknowledge Jesus as divine, (i.e. your criticism is based on religious bias), then I suppose it's possible you're a religious bigot without being anti-Semitic.

If you are an atheist, agnostic, or otherwise distain religious doctrine or religious organization, then I suppose you can criticize Judaism but you are likely to criticize most religions at the same time -- maybe others much more than Judaism.

If you are in the second category, above, the Christian religion should probably highest on you bad guy list on account of its heavy emphasis on theological, (trinitarian, Christological), doctrine and the authoritarian organization of the Roman Catholic Church.
I'm not really saying so much as any of that. I'm Jewish by background and something like agnostic-atheist. I think Christians generally criticize Judaism on that basis. That's religion. Christian-Jewish dialogue is important as is other dialogues - especially in our post-Shoah world.
I'm just saying that we shouldn't be too sensitive or that people seem oversensitive these days. But not in the case of Mel probably. Unless one buys his apology. I'm all for apology. I used to be a big fan of Elvis Costello when I was in high school. Now, Declan said something very unfortunate when he was coming up. He apologized. No one remembers it. I saw him on Bill Maher when Maher said to him something like, "you've never had any controversy." He was like, "Um..."
Anyway, I don't think "cancel culture" is about this stuff really. I've seen that reality up close and it's a bit different.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on December 03, 2021, 06:13:15 AM
Quote from: milk on December 03, 2021, 05:37:30 AM
I'm not really saying so much as any of that. I'm Jewish by background and something like agnostic-atheist. I think Christians generally criticize Judaism on that basis. That's religion. Christian-Jewish dialogue is important as is other dialogues - especially in our post-Shoah world.
I'm just saying that we shouldn't be too sensitive or that people seem oversensitive these days. But not in the case of Mel probably. Unless one buys his apology. I'm all for apology. I used to be a big fan of Elvis Costello when I was in high school. Now, Declan said something very unfortunate when he was coming up. He apologized. No one remembers it. I saw him on Bill Maher when Maher said to him something like, "you've never had any controversy." He was like, "Um..."
Anyway, I don't think "cancel culture" is about this stuff really. I've seen that reality up close and it's a bit different.

I should hasten to say the I'm not Jewish nor of Jewish extraction, and I am "something like agnostic-atheist" though I was raised Christian.  And I'll admit I said some "very unfortunate" things in my youth too but they are alien to my present feelings.

The bigger question today is whether one can harshly criticize the state of Israel without being anti-Semitic.  Logically and fairly one can.  However I've known many Jews who don't accept that.  I've known hundreds or probably thousands of Jews on account when I live and when to school.  I'd venture to say that vast majority of Canadian and American Jews identify so closely on an emotional level Israel that they genuinely can't see the difference.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on December 03, 2021, 07:11:26 AM
I don't have stats here now, but the the people of Jewish race and/or Jewish religion in the West increasingly became anti-Israel, or less supportive of Israel in this century.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on December 03, 2021, 07:14:03 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on December 03, 2021, 06:13:15 AM
I should hasten to say the I'm not Jewish nor of Jewish extraction, and I am "something like agnostic-atheist" though I was raised Christian.  And I'll admit I said some "very unfortunate" things in my youth too but they are alien to my present feelings.

The bigger question today is whether one can harshly criticize the state of Israel without being anti-Semitic.  Logically and fairly one can.  However I've known many Jews who don't accept that.  I've known hundreds or probably thousands of Jews on account when I live and when to school.  I'd venture to say that vast majority of Canadian and American Jews identify so closely on an emotional level Israel that they genuinely can't see the difference.
There's a large number of Jewish people who have that attachment and sentiment. There are some very prominent Jewish people who do not. I think these laws that penalize people for having an anti-Israel opinion (maybe Texas?) should be struck down. I don't think people should be de-platformed, banned, cancelled, etc. for being BDS, even though I disagree with them somewhat. I do draw the line with Hamas but I'm not an expert in this area to really explain the details. I work with a professor who's got all these pro-Palestinian pictures and messages on and around his door and some of them are militant-sounding. He's got pictures of rifles and other stuff. He once said to a colleague in front of me, referring to - I think - Michelle Goldberg, "she's one of the good ones," or something like that. That was a few years ago. If you replaced Jews with some other minority group in this scenario, it'd be a cancelable offense? Anyway, I do agree that the ADL cries wolf on this issue. Being "anti-Israel government" in a political sense is legitimate IMO. These days, I don't totally understand where the politics of that situation is supposed to be heading.
I wonder if anyone caught the joke Dave Chappelle made about Jews and Israel amidst all the brouhaha over the trans stuff?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on December 03, 2021, 07:17:26 AM
Quote from: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on December 03, 2021, 07:11:26 AM
I don't have stats here now, but the the people of Jewish race and/or Jewish religion in the West increasingly became anti-Israel, or less supportive of Israel in this century.
A little less supportive probably. When my parents were young, Israel was unquestionable and they did all kinds of things like money for trees and bonds and what have you. I'm actually sorry I took the party instead of the Kibbutz when I was 13. I'd be a whole different person.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on December 03, 2021, 01:02:25 PM
Appeals court weighs whether Justice Department should substitute for Trump in defamation suit

https://abcnews.go.com/US/appeals-court-weighs-justice-department-substitute-trump-defamation/story?id=81540754

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 03, 2021, 01:23:07 PM
Parents of Michigan school-shooting suspect charged with four counts of involuntary manslaughter
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on December 03, 2021, 01:31:14 PM
Quote from: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on December 03, 2021, 07:11:26 AM
I don't have stats here now, but the the people of Jewish race and/or Jewish religion in the West increasingly became anti-Israel, or less supportive of Israel in this century.

It's not complicated:

https://www.youtube.com/v/7ebPj_FqM5Q
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 03, 2021, 02:17:47 PM
This might be paywalled, but perhaps there's a Google workaround:

https://www.economist.com/leaders/2021/12/04/the-democrats-fiscal-policy-makes-a-mockery-of-their-progressive-pledges

The tax plans of President Joe Biden were once full of lofty promises. He and Democrats in Congress would reverse Donald Trump's tax cuts, make the wealthy pay more and fully fund all manner of desperately needed climate and social-policy programmes with the proceeds. The middle class would rise and the top 1% would manage. As the messy drafting of Mr Biden's main spending bill—the Build Back Better Act—nears its conclusion after months of wheeling and dealing, it is clear that, when it comes to tax, the result is not lofty at all.

The president was unable to whip his slim congressional majorities into reversing Mr Trump's tax law and increasing marginal rates on capital gains, corporate profits or top individual incomes. And so his plan to raise revenue is a hotch-potch of unorthodox measures, including a new minimum tax on corporate-book income, an excise tax on stock buy-backs and a new surtax on those with incomes above $10m. The wisdom of these measures can be debated. What cannot is a last-minute addition to the bill that would spend hundreds of billions of dollars subsidising the richest residents of New York and California.

The state-and-local-tax (salt) deduction lets Americans cut their federal-tax liability if they pay lots of income and property tax at the state and local level. Before 2017 this provision was limitless, letting plutocrats in high-tax states deduct all the property tax on their mansions and the state income tax on their millions, at the expense of federal taxpayers everywhere. Mr Trump's tax law capped the tax exemption at $10,000. Rather than welcome this as a step towards their goal of more redistribution, Democrats in high-tax states moaned that they had been punitively targeted. Just before Build Back Better passed the House of Representatives on November 19th, they raised the cap to $80,000 a year.


The result is a fiscal fiasco. In the next five years the benefit will cost $275bn. Exactly none of it will go to the bottom 60% of earners. Instead 70% of the gains will go to the top 5%. For a party that came to power condemning Mr Trump's tax reform for being regressive, the stain of hypocrisy will be hard to wash out....
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 03, 2021, 05:25:43 PM
As to "the stain of hypocrisy" where do they factor in the Republican stonewalling? Where the Manchin/Sinema factor?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 03, 2021, 05:40:17 PM
For the record, for me the greatest disappointment in the Biden administration has been the insufficient/disorganized strategy to buttress voting rights. Not that this to be laid absolutely at Biden's feet, but the sustained and terribly organized Republican assault on democracy here will lead first to a GQP lock on power, and then (considering all the complicit upprt-level Repubs, a slide into authoritarianism.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 03, 2021, 06:48:37 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 03, 2021, 05:25:43 PM
As to "the stain of hypocrisy" where do they factor in the Republican stonewalling? Where the Manchin/Sinema factor?

Those things were predictable. Democrats overplayed their hand, and never really possessed the power to pass sweeping mandates. Their (doomed) majority in the House was offset by a nonexistent (given the 2 DINOs) "majority" in the Senate. Much of the ballyhooed progressive program had no chance of ever seeing the light of day.

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 03, 2021, 05:40:17 PM
For the record, for me the greatest disappointment in the Biden administration has been the insufficient/disorganized strategy to buttress voting rights. Not that this to be laid absolutely at Biden's feet, but the sustained and terribly organized Republican assault on democracy here will lead first to a GQP lock on power, and then (considering all the complicit upprt-level Repubs, a slide into authoritarianism.

Agreed. Not sure they could have succeeded, but there was no apparent strategy.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 03, 2021, 09:06:04 PM
Quote from: T. D. on December 03, 2021, 06:48:37 PM
Those things were predictable. Democrats overplayed their hand, and never really possessed the power to pass sweeping mandates. Their (doomed) majority in the House was offset by a nonexistent (given the 2 DINOs) "majority" in the Senate. Much of the ballyhooed progressive program had no chance of ever seeing the light of day.

Agreed. Not sure they could have succeeded, but there was no apparent strategy.

All your points well taken.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on December 03, 2021, 09:17:00 PM
Quote from: T. D. on December 03, 2021, 06:48:37 PMAgreed. Not sure they could have succeeded, but there was no apparent strategy.

Huh? Their strategy was to pass into law one of the two comprehensive packages of voting rights legislation before the Congress. The problem is that in the Senate the Democrats do not have a real majority. There are 50 votes in the Democrat caucus, which means they can force a tie and bring in Harris as the tie breaking vote. Joe Manchin has refused to support the legislation. When you don't have a majority you can only block things, you can't do things.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on December 04, 2021, 05:28:18 AM
Quote from: T. D. on December 03, 2021, 06:48:37 PM
Those things were predictable. Democrats overplayed their hand, and never really possessed the power to pass sweeping mandates. Their (doomed) majority in the House was offset by a nonexistent (given the 2 DINOs) "majority" in the Senate. Much of the ballyhooed progressive program had no chance of ever seeing the light of day.

"Politics is the art of the possible, the attainable — the art of the next best" ~ Otto von Bismarck

Much and all that I agree with the Democrat progressive, Bismarck's insight is something they should take to heart.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 04, 2021, 08:38:44 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on December 04, 2021, 05:28:18 AM
"Politics is the art of the possible, the attainable — the art of the next best" ~ Otto von Bismarck

Much and all that I agree with the Democrat progressive, Bismarck's insight is something they should take to heart.

Indeed.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 04, 2021, 10:36:31 AM
Michigan school shooting suspect's parents held on $500,000 bond each as judge expresses flight-risk concerns

Acting on a tip, police found the pair hiding in a commercial building, authorities said
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 04, 2021, 10:41:07 AM
The pistol, purchased by James Crumbley on Nov. 26, was stored in an unlocked drawer in the parents' bedroom, according to officials.

A day before the fatal shooting, a teacher noticed Ethan Crumbley using his cellphone to search for information on firearm ammunition. Jennifer Crumbley did not respond when the school contacted her via voice mail about her son's "inappropriate" search, McDonald said. Instead, she exchanged a text message with her son that read, "LOL I'm not mad at you. You have to learn not to get caught."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on December 04, 2021, 03:50:44 PM
Quote from: Daverz on December 03, 2021, 01:31:14 PM
It's not complicated:

https://www.youtube.com/v/7ebPj_FqM5Q
How did that guy end up dying so young? This is a bad place to debate that issue but I don't buy that it's as simple as Brooks said. I AM wondering if people still feel a two-state solution is possible? Maybe that needs another thread. I honestly don't know so much about the issue. That the far-left has tried to make it about race is annoying.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on December 04, 2021, 05:54:21 PM
Quote from: milk on December 04, 2021, 03:50:44 PM
How did that guy end up dying so young? This is a bad place to debate that issue but I don't buy that it's as simple as Brooks said. I AM wondering if people still feel a two-state solution is possible? Maybe that needs another thread. I honestly don't know so much about the issue. That the far-left has tried to make it about race is annoying.

It is not complicated if like Brooks you pretend that Palestinians are completely innocent people, ignoring the 20 years of violence (most of it attacking Arabs attacking Jews, not vice versa) that preceded 1948, the extremism and terrorism that have been the dominant voice in Palestinian discourse ever since 1948, the fact that what the great majority of Palestinians want is a state in which they don't have to live with Jews (the moderates are content with a two state solution, as long as one is only Palestinians)--that is, an apartheid ethnostate of the sort which antizionists claim to be against--and similar considerations.

Not all antizionists are antisemites, but almost all antisemites are antizionists because it provides a socially acceptable way of hating Jews.  And enough antizionists seem to think of the Jewish community in the West as merely an extension of "Zionism" and therefore legitimate targets of boycott and insult that antisemitism is a fair charge against them.

It should also be remembered that Western antizionism--which is based on a false version of Jewish history derived from Christian supersessionism and 19th century antisemitism--was developed by Soviet idealogues to give the USSR a way to influence Muslim countries and to justify persecution of Jews within the USSR. "The evil that men do lives on long after them" applies here.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on December 05, 2021, 04:49:48 AM
Quote from: JBS on December 04, 2021, 05:54:21 PM
It is not complicated if like Brooks you pretend that Palestinians are completely innocent people, ignoring the 20 years of violence (most of it attacking Arabs attacking Jews, not vice versa) that preceded 1948, the extremism and terrorism that have been the dominant voice in Palestinian discourse ever since 1948, the fact that what the great majority of Palestinians want is a state in which they don't have to live with Jews (the moderates are content with a two state solution, as long as one is only Palestinians)--that is, an apartheid ethnostate of the sort which antizionists claim to be against--and similar considerations.

I'm afraid I'm hearing just standard, pro-Zionist apologetic for policies and actions of the Israeli state.

Granted, Palestinians by their own action have provided Israeli governments plenty of excuses to suppress them.  Palestinians have been stupid, by refusal to find compromises with Israel and amongst themselves, and restrain their own radicals.  But it's rare in historical situations that the deprived and disposed are totally saintly in their struggles, (not excluding Gandhi).

For their part, Palestinians broadly see Jewish settlement o Palestine, including today in the West Bank, as largely European neo-colonialism.  Of course that's not how Zionists see the situation but it's not an unreasonable assessment from a disinterested POV.


Quote from: JBS on December 04, 2021, 05:54:21 PM
Not all antizionists are antisemites, but almost all antisemites are antizionists because it provides a socially acceptable way of hating Jews.  And enough antizionists seem to think of the Jewish community in the West as merely an extension of "Zionism" and therefore legitimate targets of boycott and insult that antisemitism is a fair charge against them.

It should also be remembered that Western antizionism--which is based on a false version of Jewish history derived from Christian supersessionism and 19th century antisemitism--was developed by Soviet idealogues to give the USSR a way to influence Muslim countries and to justify persecution of Jews within the USSR. "The evil that men do lives on long after them" applies here.

But not all "anti-Zionism", (your term) -- more precisely criticism of the Israeli state, its policies and behaviors and those of segments of its Jewish population -- is anti-Semitism -- to imply such isn't a fair or logical basis to deflect criticism of Israeli behavior towards Palestinians.

Warning:  strawman.  Western criticism of Israel is not based on a false version of Jewish history -- it is based on the 20th century and current history of the Israeli state.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on December 05, 2021, 04:53:31 PM
Quote from: Fëanor on December 05, 2021, 04:49:48 AM
I'm afraid I'm hearing just standard, pro-Zionist apologetic for policies and actions of the Israeli state.
I'm guessing the arguments from both sides are standard at this point. Does anyone have anything to say that hasn't already been said? That doesn't mean that I'm not interested because I always find the issue complicated and hard to follow. I'd like to see sides continue to make arguments here but I'm afraid it will be too off-topic. I have a hard time making my mind up about it. I think there is blame to go around. The sides seem more dug-in than ever. Gaza isn't controlled by a reasonable partner anymore anyway? I mean its not a democracy that can be engaged? I don't know. Lots of far-left types seem to reject two-state these days? They want something more radical?

Quote from: Fëanor on December 05, 2021, 04:49:48 AM

For their part, Palestinians broadly see Jewish settlement o Palestine, including today in the West Bank, as largely European neo-colonialism.  Of course that's not how Zionists see the situation but it's not an unreasonable assessment from a disinterested POV.

I guess there are books on it but why do YOU see it that way? I mean leaving aside the agreements Israel has with the U.S., are the people of Israel European colonists? It doesn't seem so to me but, again, what do I know.

I can see why many people, some of them good friends, see Israel as belligerent. I can see why some people I know, some friends, see Israel in a different light.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on December 05, 2021, 05:27:18 PM
Quote from: Fëanor on December 05, 2021, 04:49:48 AM

But not all "anti-Zionism", (your term) -- more precisely criticism of the Israeli state, its policies and behaviors and those of segments of its Jewish population -- is anti-Semitism -- to imply such isn't a fair or logical basis to deflect criticism of Israeli behavior towards Palestinians.

Warning:  strawman.  Western criticism of Israel is not based on a false version of Jewish history -- it is based on the 20th century and current history of the Israeli state.

Unfortunately Leftist antizionism is not any form of reasonable criticism of Israel and its policies. Leftist antizionism has adopted the extremist position that Jews have no legitimate connection what is now Israel/Palestine, are all Kahanists, that terrorism is moral and Hamas are heroic freedom fighters whose deviations from Western liberal ideals must be tolerated in the name of freeing Palestine. Even the relatively mild criticism of Palestinians which you expressed is more than most of them can manage.
And they cheer on people who openly say killing Jews is a good thing.
No change in Israeli policy will satisfy them because in their eyes the existence of Israel is an intrinsic wrong.

But the idea of Israelis being colonial settlers is straight out of Soviet ideology, no matter who voices it today, as is the idea that Jews are a religious community, not an ethnic group.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: amw on December 05, 2021, 06:47:28 PM
I feel like this topic may be more appropriate for a thread entitled "Israeli & Palestinian Politics" personally.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on December 05, 2021, 08:28:01 PM
Quote from: JBS on December 05, 2021, 05:27:18 PM
Unfortunately Leftist antizionism is not any form of reasonable criticism of Israel and its policies. Leftist antizionism has adopted the extremist position that Jews have no legitimate connection what is now Israel/Palestine, are all Kahanists, that terrorism is moral and Hamas are heroic freedom fighters whose deviations from Western liberal ideals must be tolerated in the name of freeing Palestine. Even the relatively mild criticism of Palestinians which you expressed is more than most of them can manage.
And they cheer on people who openly say killing Jews is a good thing.
No change in Israeli policy will satisfy them because in their eyes the existence of Israel is an intrinsic wrong.

But the idea of Israelis being colonial settlers is straight out of Soviet ideology, no matter who voices it today, as is the idea that Jews are a religious community, not an ethnic group.

Which "leftist antizionists" think all of this?

I'm really asking.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on December 05, 2021, 10:43:12 PM
Quote from: amw on December 05, 2021, 06:47:28 PM
I feel like this topic may be more appropriate for a thread entitled "Israeli & Palestinian Politics" personally.
probably so. I'm really interested in it but I think the topic will outwear its welcome. Maybe if it can be kept to a page or two and maybe if it can be brought back to how the topic affects and is affected by U.S. politics. It has come up before.
Quote from: SimonNZ on December 05, 2021, 08:28:01 PM
Which "leftist antizionists" think all of this?

I'm really asking.
I've met plenty of people with views like this. I don't know about "all." I work in an international setting and it's interesting what people say about this topic.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on December 05, 2021, 10:59:10 PM
Quote from: amw on December 05, 2021, 06:47:28 PM
I feel like this topic may be more appropriate for a thread entitled "Israeli & Palestinian Politics" personally.

Agree.

It's a rather separate field of, let's say frustrations, though the Israeli policy towards Palestinians gets the strongest outside support from circles in the US.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on December 06, 2021, 03:02:55 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on December 05, 2021, 08:28:01 PM
Which "leftist antizionists" think all of this?

I'm really asking.

In the context of US politics, the sort of people who  are active in DSA and Sunrise Movement.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on December 06, 2021, 03:25:30 AM
Quote from: milk on December 05, 2021, 10:43:12 PM
Quote from: amw on December 05, 2021, 06:47:28 PM
I feel like this topic may be more appropriate for a thread entitled "Israeli & Palestinian Politics" personally.
probably so. I'm really interested in it but I think the topic will outwear its welcome. Maybe if it can be kept to a page or two and maybe if it can be brought back to how the topic affects and is affected by U.S. politics. It has come up before.
I've met plenty of people with views like this. I don't know about "all." I work in an international setting and it's interesting what people say about this topic.

Opps!! Are we quite ready to get on to the topic of US support for Israel and the reasons for that support?  ::)

It's a complex topic and drags up issues of pro-Zionist lobbying in the USA.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on December 06, 2021, 03:50:03 AM
Quote from: JBS on December 05, 2021, 05:27:18 PM
Unfortunately Leftist antizionism is not any form of reasonable criticism of Israel and its policies. Leftist antizionism has adopted the extremist position that Jews have no legitimate connection what is now Israel/Palestine, are all Kahanists, that terrorism is moral and Hamas are heroic freedom fighters whose deviations from Western liberal ideals must be tolerated in the name of freeing Palestine. Even the relatively mild criticism of Palestinians which you expressed is more than most of them can manage.
And they cheer on people who openly say killing Jews is a good thing.
No change in Israeli policy will satisfy them because in their eyes the existence of Israel is an intrinsic wrong.

But the idea of Israelis being colonial settlers is straight out of Soviet ideology, no matter who voices it today, as is the idea that Jews are a religious community, not an ethnic group.

More flimsy, specious Zionist apologetics.

Q: Is Judaism religious or ethnic?  A: Yes.

Theodor Herzl conceived the Zionist movement at the height of European nationalist fervor:  there is implicit connection with that European phenomenon.

When a group of people from one continent decide to move to another with the intent of living there when the latter place is already occupied by another people who didn't invite and don't want them, it's call "colonialism".  E.g. when English settlers moved to what they called New England and the Carolinas it was contrary to the wishes of the natives of the place; that was colonialism and  founded places were call "colonies".  Antagonisms ensued between settlers and natives.

To suggest that a people who haven't dwelt in a place for almost 2000 years some how an historical, much less a religious, right to live there is patently ridiculous.

It's interesting to note that US sponsorship and support for Israel was & is far greater than British support ever ever was for the American colonists.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on December 06, 2021, 04:16:27 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on December 06, 2021, 03:50:03 AM
More flimsy, specious Zionist apologetics.

Q: Is Judaism religious or ethnic?  A: Yes.

Theodor Herzl conceived the Zionist movement at the height of European nationalist fervor:  there is implicit connection with that European phenomenon.

When a group of people from one continent decide to move to another with the intent of living there when the latter place is already occupied by another people who didn't invite and don't want them, it's call "colonialism".  E.g. when English settlers moved to what they called New England and the Carolinas it was contrary to the wishes of the natives of the place; that was colonialism and  founded places were call "colonies".  Antagonisms ensued between settlers and natives.

To suggest that a people who haven't dwelt in a place for almost 2000 years some how an historical, much less a religious, right to live there is patently ridiculous.

It's interesting to note that US sponsorship and support for Israel was & is far greater than British support ever ever was for the American colonists.

There have been Jews in the Holy Land for over 3000 years.

By your logic, Cherokees have no right to live in Georgia because white people live there now.

For the sake of the forum, I'll shut up about this topic now.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on December 06, 2021, 04:35:22 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on December 06, 2021, 03:50:03 AM
More flimsy, specious Zionist apologetics.

Q: Is Judaism religious or ethnic?  A: Yes.

Theodor Herzl conceived the Zionist movement at the height of European nationalist fervor:  there is implicit connection with that European phenomenon.

When a group of people from one continent decide to move to another with the intent of living there when the latter place is already occupied by another people who didn't invite and don't want them, it's call "colonialism".  E.g. when English settlers moved to what they called New England and the Carolinas it was contrary to the wishes of the natives of the place; that was colonialism and  founded places were call "colonies".  Antagonisms ensued between settlers and natives.

But most Israeli Jews aren't from another continent - not even by ethnicity. So that leaves a kind of philosophical connection. But aren't all modern countries influenced by ethnic nationalism - except for a few notable exceptions like the U.S. and Switzerland? Is the concept of Palestine free from "nationalistic fervor"? I honestly don't know. I expect you'll have an answer and someone else a counter-argument. I'm assuming the concept of a "Palestinian state" is as modern as nationalism-s and Israel as well? 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 06, 2021, 06:09:35 AM
Students have faced a huge jump in 'hostile behaviors,' a new report finds. Attacks with weapons doubled.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on December 06, 2021, 07:10:52 AM
Quote from: JBS on December 06, 2021, 04:16:27 AM
There have been Jews in the Holy Land for over 3000 years.

By your logic, Cherokees have no right to live in Georgia because white people live there now.

For the sake of the forum, I'll shut up about this topic now.

Yes, there have been Jews in Palestine all that time and many other places in the Middle East too.  It's not the these native Jew or their descendants that comprise the vast majority of Israeli Jews today.  Jews lived relatively peacefully, (along with Christians and Yazidis), for most of that time;  expulsion Jews and these others from countries like Iraq are occurring today mostly on account of resentment towards Israel.

No, of course Cherokees ought not to have been forced out of Georgia;  same as Palestinians ought not to have been forced into exile from Palestine.  I think you got it backwards.

But I agree the discussion ought to below in another thread at least.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on December 06, 2021, 07:22:38 AM
Quote from: milk on December 06, 2021, 04:35:22 AM
But most Israeli Jews aren't from another continent - not even by ethnicity. So that leaves a kind of philosophical connection. But aren't all modern countries influenced by ethnic nationalism - except for a few notable exceptions like the U.S. and Switzerland? Is the concept of Palestine free from "nationalistic fervor"? I honestly don't know. I expect you'll have an answer and someone else a counter-argument. I'm assuming the concept of a "Palestinian state" is as modern as nationalism-s and Israel as well?

The notion that Jews whose ancestors left the ME during the Roman Empire have some inherent claim to that region today is totally bogus.

The idea of a "Palestinian state" is no more or less artificial that the separate nationalisms of Iraq, Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, et al.  The separate existences of these states today, as opposed to a  more all-inclusive Arab nation, is almost entirely the result of British and French imperialism.

I'm going to do my part to end this discussion here because it's mostly not about current US politics.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: bhodges on December 06, 2021, 07:29:42 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on December 06, 2021, 07:22:38 AM
I'm going to do my part to end this discussion here because it's mostly not about current US politics.

Thank you.

--Bruce
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 06, 2021, 08:14:26 AM
And there's no want of human rights issues within the thread's purview.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 06, 2021, 10:27:54 AM
Justice Dept. sues Texas over state redistricting maps, citing discrimination against Latinos
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 06, 2021, 10:29:59 AM
Sidney Powell group raised more than $14 million spreading election falsehoods
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 06, 2021, 10:31:10 AM
Trump SPAC under investigation by financial regulators
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on December 06, 2021, 10:59:42 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 06, 2021, 10:27:54 AM
Justice Dept. sues Texas over state redistricting maps, citing discrimination against Latinos

I'm thrilled. As long as I don't get Louis Gohmert back.

8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on December 06, 2021, 11:00:52 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 06, 2021, 10:29:59 AM
Sidney Powell group raised more than $14 million spreading election falsehoods

I'm blasé. If you want to spend your life savings on those douchebags, more power to you.

8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on December 06, 2021, 11:01:40 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 06, 2021, 10:31:10 AM
Trump SPAC under investigation by financial regulators

I'm unsurprised. SOB is crookeder than a dog's hind leg.

8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on December 06, 2021, 11:44:52 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 06, 2021, 10:27:54 AM
Justice Dept. sues Texas over state redistricting maps, citing discrimination against Latinos
Yes!  :)

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 08, 2021, 07:13:20 AM

     The West's Nuclear Mistake (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/12/germany-california-nuclear-power-climate/620888/)

All energy choices entail trade-offs. Wind interferes with migratory birds and despoils open vistas. Solar panels are manufactured by coerced labor. Fabricating the panels—and disposing of them—can exude hazardous materials into the environment. Nuclear energy, too, has costs and hazards: radiation risks in the present; the disposal of spent fuel that must be safeguarded for centuries to come. But no other technology can so massively and so rapidly substitute for carbon-emitting electrical generation. No government that really regarded climate change as its top energy priority would close nuclear plants before the end of their useful lives.

The world is warming because political systems find it hard to act today against the problems of tomorrow. Balancing present fears against future dangers is difficult. Nuclear seems scary. Climate change seems remote. And so in Germany and in California, politicians protect themselves in the here and now with choices whose costs will be paid decades later.

In American eyes, Merkel's reputation has benefited from the comparison with Donald Trump, who singled her out as the democratic leader he disliked most. American journalists even touted her as the true leader of the free world, to jab at an American president who had abdicated that role. There is much to appreciate about her reticent style of leadership. But history may judge that, on one of the most consequential issues of her chancellorship, Merkel not only led from behind; she led in the wrong direction. And unfortunately for the world, Americans seem determined to follow Merkel's path.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on December 08, 2021, 07:28:10 AM
There's increased discussion in Europe about expanding nuclear power again; Macron for example has big plans.

'Nuclear energy, too, has costs and hazards: radiation risks in the present; the disposal of spent fuel that must be safeguarded for centuries to come.'

No, it tends to be considerably more than that. For example, the Finnish storage facility used for such deposits calculates with 100,000 years of storage of the nuclear waste, as a necessary range.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 08, 2021, 11:04:11 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on December 08, 2021, 07:28:10 AM
There's increased discussion in Europe about expanding nuclear power again; Macron for example has big plans.

'Nuclear energy, too, has costs and hazards: radiation risks in the present; the disposal of spent fuel that must be safeguarded for centuries to come.'

No, it tends to be considerably more than that. For example, the Finnish storage facility used for such deposits calculates with 100,000 years of storage of the nuclear waste, as a necessary range.

     Long term storage is not a technical problem, it's a political one. The Finns are not proposing to store nuclear waste, they are doing it. I see no serious problem in doing what we do.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 08, 2021, 11:05:15 AM
The mind reels.
Quote from: MusicTurner on December 08, 2021, 07:28:10 AM
There's increased discussion in Europe about expanding nuclear power again; Macron for example has big plans.

'Nuclear energy, too, has costs and hazards: radiation risks in the present; the disposal of spent fuel that must be safeguarded for centuries to come.'

No, it tends to be considerably more than that. For example, the Finnish storage facility used for such deposits calculates with 100,000 years of storage of the nuclear waste, as a necessary range.

The mind reels.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on December 08, 2021, 11:10:17 AM
"Can you lend us a bit of environmental insecurity, only potentially catastrophic? Don't worry, it will be over in 100,000 years".
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 08, 2021, 11:17:45 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 08, 2021, 11:05:15 AM
The mind reels.


     Would it be worse if it was a billion years? What do reeling minds advise we do with radioactive waste? I say we store it in bunkers underground surrounded by a fence with signs that have evil symbols on them, and keep the stuff there until we figure out how to transmute it to safe isotopes.

     Accelerator Transmutation of Waste (http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2011/ph241/ray2/)

     It probably won't take 100,000 years to do this, but I can wait.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: fbjim on December 08, 2021, 11:46:07 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on December 08, 2021, 11:10:17 AM
"Can you lend us a bit of environmental insecurity, only potentially catastrophic? Don't worry, it will be over in 100,000 years".

the problem with this is that you're raising a potential environmental catastrophe but we're already dealing with an actual environmental catastrophe in climate change


in lieu of a drastic reduction of energy usage, which isn't going to happen unless severe foundational changes to human society occur, this is one of the more realistic options available to us
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on December 08, 2021, 12:13:44 PM
Quote from: drogulus on December 08, 2021, 07:13:20 AM
     The West's Nuclear Mistake (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/12/germany-california-nuclear-power-climate/620888/)

All energy choices entail trade-offs. Wind interferes with migratory birds and despoils open vistas. Solar panels are manufactured by coerced labor. Fabricating the panels—and disposing of them—can exude hazardous materials into the environment. Nuclear energy, too, has costs and hazards: radiation risks in the present; the disposal of spent fuel that must be safeguarded for centuries to come. But no other technology can so massively and so rapidly substitute for carbon-emitting electrical generation. No government that really regarded climate change as its top energy priority would close nuclear plants before the end of their useful lives.

The world is warming because political systems find it hard to act today against the problems of tomorrow. Balancing present fears against future dangers is difficult. Nuclear seems scary. Climate change seems remote. And so in Germany and in California, politicians protect themselves in the here and now with choices whose costs will be paid decades later.

In American eyes, Merkel's reputation has benefited from the comparison with Donald Trump, who singled her out as the democratic leader he disliked most. American journalists even touted her as the true leader of the free world, to jab at an American president who had abdicated that role. There is much to appreciate about her reticent style of leadership. But history may judge that, on one of the most consequential issues of her chancellorship, Merkel not only led from behind; she led in the wrong direction. And unfortunately for the world, Americans seem determined to follow Merkel's path.


Of course nuclear is the way to go.  Up-to-date technologies are extremely safe:  nukes are as safe as any form of energy production (https://www.altenergymag.com/article/2020/03/what-is-the-safest-energy-for-the-future/32904#:~:text=nuclear%20energy%20is%20by%20far,38%20times%20fewer%20than%20gas.) and lowest in emissions. New tech will make it much safer still.
Wind and solar are apparently close (https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy), they are variable depending on the weather.

Objection to nuclear energy is simply irrational and that irrationality can no longer be tolerated give the impending global warming catastrophe.  See ...https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy (https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on December 08, 2021, 12:19:35 PM
Quote from: drogulus on December 08, 2021, 11:04:11 AM
     Long term storage is not a technical problem, it's a political one. The Finns are not proposing to store nuclear waste, they are doing it. I see no serious problem in doing what we do.

That's right.  The shear volume of waste is very small and can be store effectively forever is necessary.
Nuclear power technologies exist that can reuse wastes to further reduce volumes and store requirements accordingly.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on December 08, 2021, 12:44:19 PM
It's even possible that nuclear fusion will become viable in less than 100,000 years.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: krummholz on December 08, 2021, 05:59:59 PM
Google "IFR reactor" for an example of a design that recycles nuclear waste to extract even more energy from it, and in the end, produces only small quantities of end-product waste that must be sequestered over long time scales. This technology has existed for over 35 years now; the only barrier to implementing it on a commercial scale is political, mainly a very remote risk of diversion into weapons applications (it's a "breeder"-type reactor).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: krummholz on December 08, 2021, 06:01:27 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on December 08, 2021, 12:44:19 PM
It's even possible that nuclear fusion will become viable in less than 100,000 years.

Maybe even less than 100 years.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on December 08, 2021, 06:34:42 PM
The bottom line is that the radioactive materials that fuel nuclear reactors already exist in our environment, but they are dispersed. We mine them, concentrate them and nuclear reactors transform them into other highly concentrated radioactive materials. It seems to me that a sensible way to dispose of the waste product might be to disperse in a way that doesn't result in high concentrations appearing in the atmosphere, ground water, etc.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on December 08, 2021, 06:35:46 PM
Quote from: krummholz on December 08, 2021, 06:01:27 PM
Maybe even less than 100 years.

Nuclear fusion is the energy source of the future. Always has been, always will be....
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on December 08, 2021, 07:33:35 PM
Quote from: Fëanor on December 08, 2021, 12:13:44 PM


Objection to nuclear energy is simply irrational and that irrationality can no longer be tolerated give the impending global warming catastrophy.

We are only ten years out from Fukushima, so some skepticism may be permitted without being called irrational.

Regarding safe and easy storage of waste as well as the safety of facilitids: how would you rate the strength of environmental regulations and enforcement where you are  or in neighboring countries? Other environmental disaster have proven that there is little incentive to do anything other than the barest minimum and little punishment when even that is not met.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on December 09, 2021, 03:17:39 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on December 08, 2021, 07:33:35 PM
We are only ten years out from Fukushima, so some skepticism may be permitted without being called irrational.

Regarding safe and easy storage of waste as well as the safety of facilitids: how would you rate the strength of environmental regulations and enforcement where you are  or in neighboring countries? Other environmental disaster have proven that there is little incentive to do anything other than the barest minimum and little punishment when even that is not met.

Your concern for regulations and, (especially) enforcement as is certainly valid.  In countries like the USA, Germany, Canada, Japan, et al., regulation &  enforcement certainly are no insurmountable barrier.

Fukushima-based concerns are overblown and therefore irrational.  As I understand only one death can be directly attributable to the Fukushima melt-down;  there are very slight increases in cancers and prenatal pregnancy terminations.  The biggest problem was the immense disruption and evacuations.
Fukushima was the result of faulty design, that is, backup generators were place where they were vulnerable to the flooding as a result of the tsunami.

Deaths from nuclear generator accident are grossly impacted by a single horrific incident, Chernobyl.

But everything is relative and everything has risks.  The objective fact remains that nuclear is far cleaner and safer than any non-weather dependent energy generation method.  The global warming crisis demands of the nuclear resource.  See ... https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy (https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: krummholz on December 09, 2021, 04:18:07 AM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on December 08, 2021, 06:35:46 PM
Nuclear fusion is the energy source of the future. Always has been, always will be....

Seems to me they said something similar about powered flight too, once upon a time...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on December 09, 2021, 04:33:12 AM
Quote from: krummholz on December 09, 2021, 04:18:07 AM
Seems to me they said something similar about powered flight too, once upon a time...

Yes, and there's been some more optimistic news regarding concrete developments in fusion energy recently.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on December 09, 2021, 06:07:46 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on December 09, 2021, 04:33:12 AM
Yes, and there's been some more optimistic news regarding concrete developments in fusion energy recently.

Such as?

I've noticed a few press releases from tech companies, military contractors, predicting that their new hot-shot team will produce a small fusion reactor on a short time line. Then....silence. They are novices who just don't understand the problem.

Edward Teller summarized the problem with fusion by magnetic confinement. "It's like trying to confine jelly with rubber bands."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 09, 2021, 06:28:27 AM

     https://www.youtube.com/v/LJ4W1g-6JiY&t
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: fbjim on December 09, 2021, 06:46:59 AM
I'm generally skeptical about tech-positivity of this kind because the message is that the solution to a large-scale problem is easy, casting some future tech as savior. Gathering the political willpower and social strength to collectively reduce consumption and production is enormously difficult- even building new nuke plants is hard. Waiting for technology X to solve everything (ideally without any required changes to the lifestyles of the average Westerner) is easy.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: fbjim on December 09, 2021, 06:49:00 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on December 09, 2021, 03:17:39 AM
Your concern for regulations and, (especially) enforcement as is certainly valid.  In countries like the USA, Germany, Canada, Japan, et al., regulation &  enforcement certainly are no insurmountable barrier.

Fukushima-based concerns are overblown and therefore irrational.  As I understand only one death can be directly attributable to the Fukushima melt-down;  there are very slight increases in cancers and prenatal pregnancy terminations.  The biggest problem was the immense disruption and evacuations.
Fukushima was the result of faulty design, that is, backup generators were place where they were vulnerable to the flooding as a result of the tsunami.

Deaths from nuclear generator accident are grossly impacted by a single horrific incident, Chernobyl.

But everything is relative and everything has risks.  The objective fact remains that nuclear is far cleaner and safer than any non-weather dependent energy generation method.  The global warming crisis demands of the nuclear resource.  See ... https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy (https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy).

It very much reminds me of the perception of safety between air travel and driving. Air travel's perception is skewed by the high visibility of incidents, while people die all the time on the roads and nobody particularly cares. As someone with a severe fear of flying*, I can sympathize.


*this pandemic has been a godsend for being an excuse to avoid flying home for the holidays  :laugh:
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on December 09, 2021, 06:51:04 AM
Quote from: drogulus on December 09, 2021, 06:28:27 AM
     https://www.youtube.com/v/LJ4W1g-6JiY&t

Interesting.

This is what I was remembering:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_Compact_Fusion_Reactor

In 2013 they promised a working fusion reactor in 5 years. They've since announced new prototypes, but no data.

I have some exposure to this stuff. I took a mathematical methods class from the fellow who became chief scientist if ITER. I had another theoretical physicist on my exam committee who became chief scientist of another fusion project. I asked him, "will fusion energy ever work?" He answered, "Of course not!" "Who are you working on it, then?" "It's such a fascinating problem, (giggle).")
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on December 09, 2021, 07:21:08 AM
I didn't watch the video & only stumble across some new at times, not making a record of them, but, in the news:

- Nov. 17th. A very good summary article, it seems, including about ITER (first test 2025, bigger tests around 2035), China CFETR (2030s), SPARC (2025 - 2030s) and GF-Culham (2025? 2030s?), Helion (2024?), and the various new techniques
https://www.nature.com/immersive/d41586-021-03401-w/index.html

- Dec. 1st SPARC https://www.wsj.com/articles/nuclear-fusion-startup-lands-1-8-billion-as-investors-chase-star-power-11638334801

- Nov.: Oncoming US Senate bill providing further means and context ($ 885 mio), but possibly with changes:
https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/proposed-nuclear-energy-and-fusion-4751783/
https://www.fusionindustryassociation.org/post/support-for-fusion-energy-in-the-house-passed-build-back-better-legislation


(etc.)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on December 09, 2021, 02:59:27 PM
Quote from: Fëanor on December 09, 2021, 03:17:39 AM
Your concern for regulations and, (especially) enforcement as is certainly valid.  In countries like the USA, Germany, Canada, Japan, et al., regulation &  enforcement certainly are no insurmountable barrier.

Fukushima-based concerns are overblown and therefore irrational.  As I understand only one death can be directly attributable to the Fukushima melt-down;  there are very slight increases in cancers and prenatal pregnancy terminations.  The biggest problem was the immense disruption and evacuations.
Fukushima was the result of faulty design, that is, backup generators were place where they were vulnerable to the flooding as a result of the tsunami.

Deaths from nuclear generator accident are grossly impacted by a single horrific incident, Chernobyl.

But everything is relative and everything has risks.  The objective fact remains that nuclear is far cleaner and safer than any non-weather dependent energy generation method.  The global warming crisis demands of the nuclear resource.  See ...

I can't share your faith in the state of environmental regulations in America, I'm afraid. I can't remember who Trump put in the head job, but it was something like Melania's florist, with a brief to get out of the way of business. I's the subject of Michael Lewis' Vook The Fifth Risk - unqualified cronies put in vital positions and the blind spots and lack of future planning that results. I'm not sure how much Biden has rolled that back, but my impression is that in most of recent times even with better focus those agencies have been toothless.

And again about regulation in neighboring countries: how much would you trust a Tijuana reactor to not have a Chernobyl-level event? That's not a Mexico problem. Nor is any reactor problem anywhere a national problem.

And even after "cleanups" from these events and leaks of waste there are ever increasing areas of earth effectively uninhabitable due to this poisoning. See Kate Brown's book Plutopia, or the closing chapeters of Anne Garrels' Putin Country for a look at out nuclear environmental future, even without catastrophic events.

Re climate change: I can only add a big yes to the person above who said we must change our profligate ways - both consumers and business - rather than hope for a future magic science fix.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 09, 2021, 03:37:21 PM

     If you want safe nuclear you have to build modern reactors and retire older ones that are more dangerous. People rightly worry about Chernobyl and Fukushima, then shit the bed by retarding progress towards reactors that can't melt down or explode. These reactors exist now, but nuclear hysteria has given rise to a form of solution hatred, as though the no nukers just can't contemplate living in a world that doesn't have nuclear panic in it. Safe reactors just don't feel right, so let's not build them. It would better to protest the ones we have for like ever if not longer.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on December 09, 2021, 03:42:44 PM
Quote from: drogulus on December 09, 2021, 03:37:21 PM
     If you want safe nuclear you have to build modern reactors and retire older ones that are more dangerous. People rightly worry about Chernobyl and Fukushima, then shit the bed by retarding progress towards reactors that can't melt down or explode. These reactors exist now, but nuclear hysteria has given rise to a form of solution hatred, as though the no nukers just can't contemplate living in a world that doesn't have nuclear panic in it. Safe reactors just don't feel right, so let's not build them. It would better to protest the ones we have for like ever if not longer.

Okay...I don't want to be a mere bed-shitter, so could I have some information about the state of this progress?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on December 09, 2021, 04:07:37 PM
Its also hard to hold a position on an issue based on what may or may not exist in the future rather than what does now. And if the decision comes down tomorrow that to address climate change all power in nuclear, then what is getting built except what exists? (Actually I'm confused by your post - you say both that we are working towards them and that they exist - do they "exist" theoretically, or in untested prototype?)

And me taking a Sounds better but I'll believe it when I see it attitude is not standing in the way of it.

And, quite frankly putting your hopes in another maybe just around the corner thing is not addressing the changes that need to be made right now.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on December 10, 2021, 03:38:22 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on December 09, 2021, 03:42:44 PM
Okay...I don't want to be a mere bed-shitter, so could I have some information about the state of this progress?

Unlike fusion reactors, the tech to produce safe nuclear reactors exists.

Google is your friend:  some results for reactors that can't melt down ...

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2018/01/24/can-we-make-a-nuclear-reactor-that-wont-melt-down/?sh=336434115b7e (https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2018/01/24/can-we-make-a-nuclear-reactor-that-wont-melt-down/?sh=336434115b7e)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium-based_nuclear_power (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium-based_nuclear_power)

https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2020/07/nuclear-power-balls-may-make-meltdowns-a-thing-of-the-past/
(https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2020/07/nuclear-power-balls-may-make-meltdowns-a-thing-of-the-past/)

https://www.businessinsider.com/chernobyl-meltdown-no-graphite-us-nuclear-reactors-2016-4 (https://www.businessinsider.com/chernobyl-meltdown-no-graphite-us-nuclear-reactors-2016-4)

https://www.technologyreview.com/2016/08/02/158134/fail-safe-nuclear-power/ (https://www.technologyreview.com/2016/08/02/158134/fail-safe-nuclear-power/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on December 10, 2021, 03:45:01 AM
Actually I spent a part of today looking at exactly those articles.

But it's unclear how much is wishful thinking and best foot forward.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on December 10, 2021, 03:55:48 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on December 09, 2021, 02:59:27 PM
I can't share your faith in the state of environmental regulations in America, I'm afraid. I can't remember who Trump put in the head job, but it was something like Melania's florist, with a brief to get out of the way of business. I's the subject of Michael Lewis' Vook The Fifth Risk - unqualified cronies put in vital positions and the blind spots and lack of future planning that results. I'm not sure how much Biden has rolled that back, but my impression is that in most of recent times even with better focus those agencies have been toothless.

And again about regulation in neighboring countries: how much would you trust a Tijuana reactor to not have a Chernobyl-level event? That's not a Mexico problem. Nor is any reactor problem anywhere a national problem.

And even after "cleanups" from these events and leaks of waste there are ever increasing areas of earth effectively uninhabitable due to this poisoning. See Kate Brown's book Plutopia, or the closing chapeters of Anne Garrels' Putin Country for a look at out nuclear environmental future, even without catastrophic events.

Re climate change: I can only add a big yes to the person above who said we must change our profligate ways - both consumers and business - rather than hope for a future magic science fix.

How many times does it need to be said?  Nukes are the safest energy source that we have -- that's base on real statistics that include both Fukushima and Chernobyl.

Old design and flaw designs were responsible in both case.  Chernobyl was an inherently archaic and dangerous design that was operated by engineers who both broke procedures and were also ignorant of dangers that they ought to have been made aware of.

Fine, Chernobyl was nasty but more people die every year from basic aspects of coal mining, transport, burning than died as a result of Chernobyl, and that's not even including resulting environmental pollution.  There is the concept of weighing of relative threats.

People ought to encourage their governments to select and build appropriate nuclear facilities -- and stop peeing themselves over exaggerated, avoidable threats.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on December 10, 2021, 04:09:01 AM
Apparently won't happen here in DK, where sustainable energy sources (no oil, coal or gas) are currently 80% of electricity consumption and 37% of the total energy consumption, with 100% of electricity and heating planned for 2035, and 100% in all sectors planned for 2050. There might be delays or political revisions, however, and I'm sure some countries will embrace more nuclear energy too, including major players.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on December 10, 2021, 04:34:16 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on December 10, 2021, 03:55:48 AM
How many times does it need to be said?  Nukes are the safest energy source that we have -


Hang on : solar and hydroelectric don't irradiate Europe. So nuclear can't be called " the safest" even if things have been improved since Chernobyl.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on December 10, 2021, 05:02:12 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on December 10, 2021, 04:34:16 AM
Hang on : solar and hydroelectric don't irradiate Europe. So nuclear can't be called " the safest" even if things have been improved since Chernobyl.

Don't get me wrong.  Wind and solar are preferable to nuclear.  The problem is that in many localities, weather-dependent source cannot provide all the continuous power of the sort to accommodate demand.  In these instance, (which are most), a base of continuous generation is necessary and nukes are far preferable to continued use of fossil fuel.

Sometimes hydro, geothermal, and tidal may be used, but they often have very negative environmental impacts that nuclear does not.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on December 10, 2021, 06:29:33 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on December 10, 2021, 03:55:48 AM
How many times does it need to be said?  Nukes are the safest energy source that we have -- that's base on real statistics that include both Fukushima and Chernobyl.

Old design and flaw designs were responsible in both case.  Chernobyl was an inherently archaic and dangerous design that was operated by engineers who both broke procedures and were also ignorant of dangers that they ought to have been made aware of.

Fine, Chernobyl was nasty but more people die every year from basic aspects of coal mining, transport, burning than died as a result of Chernobyl, and that's not even including resulting environmental pollution.  There is the concept of weighing of relative threats.

People ought to encourage their governments to select and build appropriate nuclear facilities -- and stop peeing themselves over exaggerated, avoidable threats.
Japan has a pretty bad history with nuclear power. There's a "cultural" factor too maybe. I live In Japan. It's very rigid and consensus-based and hierarchical and venal. People just looked the other way because that's the way it's done. There's also this amakudari, "descent from heaven," thing where people in academia parachute into energy companies or vice versa. No one wants to piss anyone off. It doesn't inspire confidence that competence wins the day. I'm skeptical of the whole system of engineering as well. They spent 10 billion dollars on a plant in Fukui that never operated (due to a debilitating accident there). Power companies came into small areas and bought off the local pols and built these things and it's really up in the air if they have the ability to build and regulate them safely. It's a shame because I agree that Nuclear energy would be helpful to counter global warming. But an independent regulator with real power is needed.     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 10, 2021, 08:25:00 AM

     Nuclear has the advantage of safety and and massive scalability. If we wanted to build thousands of small nuclear modules and clump them wherever it's cost effective to put them, they could provide as much electrical generation as we will need well into the future and for as long as our ability to plan affords us. It's not only for climate change reasons this would be ideal. We'd have a growth path in place all the way to whatever comes next. If the future refuses to show up (it never does, but just saying), we'll still have a better present.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: krummholz on December 11, 2021, 04:21:18 AM
The question of how useful nuclear power will be in countering global warming really comes down to how quickly and affordably new plants that incorporate passively safe designs can be planned out, built, and brought online. And there I'm pessimistic, mostly because of the regulatory burden (at least in the US, and I assume, in most western countries) that adds both years to the certification process and hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars (or euros) to the overall cost. I'm not sure we have the time to muddle through that process. I have long taken a very dim view of the alarmist talk of "climate emergency" and the "we have only 12 years to avert disaster" slogans of climate activists, but it's becoming clear that this is a very serious problem and that at least some of the more dire claims of the activists are starting to look very plausible. For example, a year or so ago a new study was published that did a very careful calculation of the equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) incorporating several important feedbacks and arrived at something like (from memory) a 66% confidence interval of 2.4 to 3.9 degrees (C) per doubling of CO2. If that study bears out, it rules out all of the low-end scenarios favored by the "lukewarmist" camp (e.g. Curry et al.) and puts us on track to easily exceed the 2 degree mark and likely reach 4 degrees by perhaps the next century. What is not so clear is the time to equilibrate, by how many years the very large heat sinks called oceans will cause the atmospheric temperature to lag behind. The current rate of warming tends to support the notion that the time lag is on the order of years not decades, and if so, that means we just won't have the time to get enough new nuclear plants online to make a significant dent in our carbon footprint.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on December 11, 2021, 05:48:11 AM
Quote from: milk on December 10, 2021, 06:29:33 AM
Japan has a pretty bad history with nuclear power. There's a "cultural" factor too maybe. I live In Japan. It's very rigid and consensus-based and hierarchical and venal. People just looked the other way because that's the way it's done. There's also this amakudari, "descent from heaven," thing where people in academia parachute into energy companies or vice versa. No one wants to piss anyone off. It doesn't inspire confidence that competence wins the day. I'm skeptical of the whole system of engineering as well. They spent 10 billion dollars on a plant in Fukui that never operated (due to a debilitating accident there). Power companies came into small areas and bought off the local pols and built these things and it's really up in the air if they have the ability to build and regulate them safely. It's a shame because I agree that Nuclear energy would be helpful to counter global warming. But an independent regulator with real power is needed.   

I have to be candid. Some American people living in foreign countries believe that they know the countries very well, or even better than the locals. Can you speak and understand Japanese like locals, in Japanese peoples' opinion, not in your opinion? Have you studied any methodologies in sociology or political science? I met many Americans in Japan (and other countries.) A great majority of them even don't say good morning or thank you in local language. They only talk in English and read (non-professional) publication in English. I don't mean to be critical, but I just want to present a realistic figure.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 11, 2021, 09:04:20 AM
Quote from: krummholz on December 11, 2021, 04:21:18 AM
The question of how useful nuclear power will be in countering global warming really comes down to how quickly and affordably new plants that incorporate passively safe designs can be planned out, built, and brought online. And there I'm pessimistic, mostly because of the regulatory burden (at least in the US, and I assume, in most western countries) that adds both years to the certification process and hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars (or euros) to the overall cost. I'm not sure we have the time to muddle through that process. I have long taken a very dim view of the alarmist talk of "climate emergency" and the "we have only 12 years to avert disaster" slogans of climate activists, but it's becoming clear that this is a very serious problem and that at least some of the more dire claims of the activists are starting to look very plausible. For example, a year or so ago a new study was published that did a very careful calculation of the equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) incorporating several important feedbacks and arrived at something like (from memory) a 66% confidence interval of 2.4 to 3.9 degrees (C) per doubling of CO2. If that study bears out, it rules out all of the low-end scenarios favored by the "lukewarmist" camp (e.g. Curry et al.) and puts us on track to easily exceed the 2 degree mark and likely reach 4 degrees by perhaps the next century. What is not so clear is the time to equilibrate, by how many years the very large heat sinks called oceans will cause the atmospheric temperature to lag behind. The current rate of warming tends to support the notion that the time lag is on the order of years not decades, and if so, that means we just won't have the time to get enough new nuclear plants online to make a significant dent in our carbon footprint.

      I see no reason why the US shouldn't be the first adopter of the best new nuclear technologies, unless I count the politics of it. As climate change disasters become more frequent and severe the public will abandon the position of not knowing very much about what is endangering them. Minds are being sharpened by brute necessity.

     When the weight of opinion shifts towards realism about what just demolished your house it will be possible to implement a Manhattan Project for power generation. It will be very expensive and thus generate vast wealth and employment. That's what building the future does.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: krummholz on December 11, 2021, 10:10:43 AM
Quote from: drogulus on December 11, 2021, 09:04:20 AM
      I see no reason why the US shouldn't be the first adopter of the best new nuclear technologies, unless I count the politics of it. As climate change disasters become more frequent and severe the public will abandon the position of not knowing very much about what is endangering them. Minds are being sharpened by brute necessity.

     When the weight of opinion shifts towards realism about what just demolished your house it will be possible to implement a Manhattan Project for power generation. It will be very expensive and thus generate vast wealth and employment. That's what building the future does.

I agree, my point was that it may not help avert climate disaster, if that is where we are headed, because of the mountains of red tape involved in bringing a new nuclear station online. And, the cost may be a significant deterrent as well. In the end, we seem not to be choosing that route for reasons of (IMO unreasonable) fear. If we had had the will and the good sense to begin building new nuclear plants 20 years ago we'd be in a better position now to start weaning ourselves off of fossil fuels, at least for electricity generation, likely in time to limit warming to 1.5 degrees. I think it is probably too late now to hope for nuclear to be a major part of the solution, but that's not a reason not to take advantage of this energy source, and in the long run, we may be thankful we did.

I'm mainly pessimistic that we are going to be able to cut emissions enough and in time to stay under 2 degrees, much less 1.5, and I don't see nuclear as the answer for the reason stated above.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 11, 2021, 10:22:42 AM
Wondering why nobody asked earlier, who invented this term and why? Or, will uber-progressive nannies sink the Democratic Party, and by extension, American democracy?

Opinion: The debate over 'Latinx' highlights a broader problem for Democrats


By Megan McArdle, Columnist
Yesterday at 6:14 p.m. EST

Monday saw the release of yet another poll showing that the term "Latinx" is unpopular among Hispanic voters — only 2 percent preferred to use it, while 40 percent found it off-putting and 30 percent said they'd be less likely to vote for a politician who deployed it. Naturally, the rest of the week was spent arguing over how much this mattered.

The term has been growing in popularity lately, often used by White politicians or columnists like myself who want to politely defer to another group's preferences. But it appears that Latinx is not, in fact, what that group wants to be called; a majority of them say they prefer the already gender-neutral "Hispanic."

This seems particularly relevant as Hispanics have begun deserting Democrats for the GOP (a Wall Street Journal poll out this week showed them evenly split between the parties). One potential culprit is the kind of progressivism that Latinx represents — hyperfocused on language policing and divisive identity issues rather than bread-and-butter policy. But one can also argue, as New York Times columnist Jamelle Bouie did, that the critics are the ones displaying a professional wordsmith's fixation on minor word choices, rather than the substantive issues that actually decide elections.

Yet this in turn invites an obvious retort: If word choice is such a minor matter, why does this graceless and unbeloved neologism keep showing up in newspaper headlines and stump speeches? And the obvious answer — to keep peace with other parts of the progressive coalition — in fact points us toward a growing problem for Democrats and the left.

Over the years, elite American institutions have grown more and more scrupulous about achieving certain kinds of demographic representation — particularly those that lean left. That's something for which they should be applauded because America's elites need to look like America.

But whatever rainbow hues of race and sexual orientation are visible in the group photos, American elites across the political spectrum are actually becoming less representative in one way: Most of them hold college degrees, and many also have advanced degrees, often from highly selective institutions.The college-educated are only about a third of the population, so they cannot build a durable majority without wooing other voters into the fold. With educational polarization rising — and older dividing lines like race beginning to fade — the left cannot afford to forget just how different educated people are from whatever demographic group they are supposed to represent.

On average, the interests, values and concerns of college-educated women differ significantly from those who aren't — and the more exclusive their education, the bigger the gap. The same is likely to be true of basically any major demographic category you'd care to name: race, immigration status, sexual orientation or gender identity.

Of course there are commonalities that the college-educated can still speak to — women with doctorate degrees worry about unwanted pregnancies and sexual assault, as do working-class women. But that doesn't mean women with college degrees can effectively represent the broader voices of "women" when issues arise in the boardroom, editorial meeting or campaign strategy session.

Educated voices often focus on aspects of common problems that are unique to themselves — witness how much coverage of sexual assault focuses on college campuses, even though college women do not appear to be at higher risk than their non-college peers. Or consider how much pro-choice rhetoric concentrates on disruptions to education or career, which may not be the top concerns of a high school dropout.

Consider, too, that the dropout is actually less likely to support liberal abortion laws than the graduate — something you wouldn't necessarily glean from listening to her educated counterparts talking about what "women" think.

And so too with "Latinx." College-educated people of any ethnicity are noticeably further left on social issues, better able to keep abreast of constantly shifting language norms, and more likely to work and socialize with the professionals who use such language. So college-educated Hispanics are probably quite a bit more comfortable with "Latinx" than working-class Hispanics are. They're also the ones likely to be sitting at the table when an institution or a politician decides to use it.

By itself, that's relatively harmless. A 2019 Pew Research Center poll showed that fewer than 1 in 4 Hispanics had even heard the term, so I doubt it's moving many votes today. But these sorts of problems also show up in policy — which might be how both political parties decided that ultraliberal immigration policy was the key to the Hispanic vote.

Turns out Hispanics' views on immigration are complicated, and relatively few of them rank the issue as their biggest worry. That might have been clear had the educated people consulted working-class Hispanic voters rather than their college-educated peers or their imaginations. While it may not matter what bespoke terms the left invents to please this or that constituency, it matters a great deal to whom they are talking — and to whom they listen before they start to speak.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 11, 2021, 03:44:30 PM
I monitor Trump's die-hard base. They're still plotting out in the open. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/12/10/michael-flynn-roger-stone-activists/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on December 11, 2021, 04:35:22 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 11, 2021, 10:22:42 AM
By Megan McArdle, Columnist

Wow, haven't seen that twit's name in a long time.  What venue is still paying for her slop?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on December 11, 2021, 05:30:32 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 11, 2021, 10:22:42 AM
Monday saw the release of yet another poll showing that the term "Latinx" is unpopular among Hispanic voters — only 2 percent preferred to use it, while 40 percent found it off-putting and 30 percent said they'd be less likely to vote for a politician who deployed it. Naturally, the rest of the week was spent arguing over how much this mattered.

The term has been growing in popularity lately, often used by White politicians or columnists like myself who want to politely defer to another group's preferences. But it appears that Latinx is not, in fact, what that group wants to be called; a majority of them say they prefer the already gender-neutral "Hispanic."
Nice to see a poll was done, otherwise people using this term would be lacking so much awareness. "Hispanic" is fine if you want to bypass the possible gender-whatever people out there. "Latinx" is just a sign of virtue signaling being out of control.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 12, 2021, 06:58:57 AM

     
Quote from: greg on December 11, 2021, 05:30:32 PM
Nice to see a poll was done, otherwise people using this term would be lacking so much awareness. "Hispanic" is fine if you want to bypass the possible gender-whatever people out there. "Latinx" is just a sign of virtue signaling being out of control.

     It's as ephemeral as the outrage manufactured about it. There are only a couple of possibilities, that new terminology will be widely adopted or it will just be in-group code for sophistos you wouldn't want to hang out with. I monitor progressive chat room shenanigans through YT and there is some freakazoidy shit going on there. But what this has to do with base progressive goals on climate, jobs, minimum wage, infrastructure etc., I know not.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 12, 2021, 08:31:21 AM
Quote from: drogulus on December 12, 2021, 06:58:57 AM
     
     It's as ephemeral as the outrage manufactured about it. There are only a couple of possibilities, that new terminology will be widely adopted or it will just be in-group code for sophistos you wouldn't want to hang out with. I monitor progressive chat room shenanigans through YT and there is some freakazoidy shit going on there. But what this has to do with base progressive goals on climate, jobs, minimum wage, infrastructure etc., I know not.

One trouble with inventing a word like Latinx is, only the "in" crowd know how to pronounce it. It becomes yet another buzzword which my eye glosses over, to pass on to actual content.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on December 12, 2021, 10:24:28 AM
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-12-12/california-to-use-texas-abortion-ruling-as-anti-gun-law-model

:laugh: This could get interesting.

California governor Gavin Newsom has called for a new California law that will effectively bar the manufacture and sale of assault rifles in the state, modeled on Texas's victory in the U.S. Supreme Court that keeps in place state legislation banning most abortions.

Newsom has directed his staff to work with the state legislature and Attorney General Rob Bonta to create a law that would allow private citizens to sue manufacturers, distributors and sellers of assault weapons, according to a statement Saturday.


The proposed California law would be shaped on the Texas legislation that makes abortions illegal after six weeks of pregnancy and allows private citizens to sue doctors or anyone who helps facilitate an abortion. The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday narrowed a legal challenge to the Texas law and left it in force.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on December 12, 2021, 11:17:06 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 12, 2021, 08:31:21 AM
One trouble with inventing a word like Latinx is, only the "in" crowd know how to pronounce it. It becomes yet another buzzword which my eye glosses over, to pass on to actual content.

It seems to me that Americans are curiously obsessed with precise names for things.  A couple of years ago on another forum I used the term "oriental" with respect to someone or other in question.  I was immediately and vehemently denounced as a probable racist for using a racist term. I was initially bewildered.

I explained that I am not a racist nor did I have  racist thoughts regarding the person being discussed;  that my own daughter-in-law of whom I am very fond is Chinese.  My denouncer eventually conceded that I wasn't purposely racist, but that I ought to have used the term, "Asian".  I assured him that I stood corrected.

I guess it goes back to Negro -> Black -> African American, whence Hispanic -> Latino/Latina -> Latinx.  (By the way, how is it pronounced?)  Perhaps it's just me who is bemused by Xe / Xem / Xir apparently preferred by some of the 'Q' community.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on December 12, 2021, 07:34:45 PM
Quote from: Fëanor on December 12, 2021, 11:17:06 AM
It seems to me that Americans are curiously obsessed with precise names for things.  A couple of years ago on another forum I used the term "oriental" with respect to someone or other in question.  I was immediately and vehemently denounced as a probable racist for using a racist term. I was initially bewildered.

I explained that I am not a racist nor did I have  racist thoughts regarding the person being discussed;  that my own daughter-in-law of whom I am very fond is Chinese.  My denouncer eventually conceded that I wasn't purposely racist, but that I ought to have used the term, "Asian".  I assured him that I stood corrected.

I guess it goes back to Negro -> Black -> African American, whence Hispanic -> Latino/Latina -> Latinx.  (By the way, how is it pronounced?)  Perhaps it's just me who is bemused by Xe / Xem / Xir apparently preferred by some of the 'Q' community.

It's been a long time since oriental came to be considered offensive when applied to a person, at least in the U.S. I recall having this pointed out to me around 1980. Supposedly the movement to replace the term "Oriental" with "Asian" originated in 1968. In an abstract sense you could argue the term is not inherently offensive since it just means "from the east." But it begs the question, "east of what?" There is an implicit assumption that Europe is the location relative to which other places are located. At the very least it is implicitly Eurocentric. But I think the bottom line is that the community came to a consensus that it wanted to chose how to refer to itself, rather than accept a label that was applied to them by others.

And no, the fact that you used the term doesn't prove you are racist, although if you insisted on continuing to use it after being made aware of cultural overtones, that would be problematic. I take it that is not the case.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on December 13, 2021, 03:53:56 AM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on December 12, 2021, 07:34:45 PM
It's been a long time since oriental came to be considered offensive when applied to a person, at least in the U.S. I recall having this pointed out to me around 1980. Supposedly the movement to replace the term "Oriental" with "Asian" originated in 1968. In an abstract sense you could argue the term is not inherently offensive since it just means "from the east." But it begs the question, "east of what?" There is an implicit assumption that Europe is the location relative to which other places are located. At the very least it is implicitly Eurocentric. But I think the bottom line is that the community came to a consensus that it wanted to chose how to refer to itself, rather than accept a label that was applied to them by others.

And no, the fact that you used the term doesn't prove you are racist, although if you insisted on continuing to use it after being made aware of cultural overtones, that would be problematic. I take it that is not the case.

I assure you I have never since used the term, "Oriental".

Of course the term, Asian, versus "Oriental", avoids any implication of outsider perspective.  Though I should say that I've heard the term, "Occidental", used non-pejoratively.

Certainly terms assume negative connotation that they did not necessarily have originally.  So the word "Negro" simply means "black" in Spanish, yet on account of use by undoubted racists especially in America, it has become repugnant, (especially in its diminutive form  :o ).

You say, "But I think the bottom line is that the community came to a consensus that it wanted to chose how to refer to itself, rather than accept a label that was applied to them by others."  I guess so, so steel yourself to use Xe/Xem/Xir.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 13, 2021, 08:24:07 AM
Opinion: Mark Meadows's coverup of Trump's coup attempt is falling apart

By Greg Sargent, Columnist
Today at 10:02 a.m. EST

In his new book, former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows offers up a version of Donald Trump's conduct on Jan. 6 that is almost comically sanitized. In his telling, the rioters attacked the Capitol with "absolutely no urging" from Trump, and the notion that Trump sought to incite them to disrupt his loss is purely an invention of the "Fake News."

In a passage that would embarrass a North Korea disinformation specialist, Meadows writes that the mob assault left Trump "mortified." But, Meadows piously insists, this didn't distract Trump from focusing only on the welfare of the country in his final days as president, a noble and selfless impulse that "never wavered."

The House select committee examining Jan. 6 has just released its report recommending contempt charges against Meadows for defying its subpoena. It blows a big hole in Meadows's pleasing little propaganda piece.

More broadly, the report will render the various GOP whitewashing devices we've heard — Trump didn't really want to overturn the election, Trump never countenanced the violence, the violence was no biggie anyway, and so on — much harder to sustain.

The report reads like a blueprint for a coup — not just for the attempt that just happened, but also for a future one. It provides a glimpse into the story the committee is piecing together about this effort to thwart a legitimately elected government from taking power, first through almost unimaginably corrupt pressure on many government actors, and then through mob violence.

What Meadows is covering up

First, the report demonstrates how frantically Meadows and Trump's other co-conspirators are covering up Trump's own reaction to the violence as it unfolded. It shows this by describing documents the committee obtained from Meadows before he decided to refuse cooperation.

For instance, the report notes that Meadows received "many messages" urging him to get Trump to issue a statement that might quell the attack. It also says Meadows was with Trump or nearby as Trump learned about it and weighed what to do in response.

Indeed, the report discloses that the committee has obtained a text message indicating that Meadows was "pushing hard" to "condemn this s--t," meaning Meadows was urging Trump to publicly call off the rioters.

Here's what this really means: Meadows almost certainly has direct knowledge of how Trump responded to all these repeated demands that he call off the violent assault. The report says the committee wants to question Meadows about this, but he's refusing to answer any questions.

What is it that Meadows does not want to testify to?

Well, we know from press accounts, such as this Post report, that Trump watched the violent assault unfold on TV and ignored many frantic pleas that he step in. One Trump adviser told The Post that Trump was enjoying the spectacle of his followers fighting on his behalf.

We also know from CNN that House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) apparently screamed similar pleas at Trump by phone as rioters tried to break into McCarthy's office. McCarthy subsequently recounted that Trump responded: "Well, Kevin, I guess these people are more upset about the election than you are."

Could it be that Meadows does not want to confirm these reports that Trump enjoyed the spectacle of the mob threatening extreme violence to lawmakers who were in process of making his loss official, and that Trump even treated their cause as a just one?

If so, it would of course make Meadows's book account appear even more laughably dishonest. This also hints at what Meadows may be concealing from the committee investigating the worst outbreak of U.S. political violence in modern times, thus showing how malicious and depraved the coverup on Trump's behalf has become.

A blueprint for a stolen election

Underscoring this point, the committee report discloses the existence of other documents it obtained from Meadows that deepen our understanding of the stolen election attempt.

For instance, the report says Meadows was on text and email chains that addressed efforts to get GOP legislators in some states to send alternate electors to Congress, potentially subverting Joe Biden's electors.

Meadows apparently declared his "love" for this scheme and wanted a "team" devoted to it. Relatedly, Meadows also appears to have pushed the idea that the vice president could subvert those electors.

What's more, the report says, Meadows sent emails urging the Justice Department to investigate claims of voter fraud, which would validate the idea that the election's outcome was dubious. (There's also some suggestion that people around Trump talked about sending in the National Guard to "protect pro-Trump people," but this is very vague.)

You can see how all this fits together: The Justice Department would manufacture the impression that Biden's win was dubious — through investigations and public statements, which Trump also pushed for — and this would create the pretext for invalidating Biden's electors in Congress.

This would be accomplished by getting Republicans in Congress to invalidate them, or by getting Trump's vice president to abuse his power to delay the count, allowing states to send rogue electors, per the plot outlined in the now-notorious coup memo.

The whole coup blueprint is right there in black and white. And so is the scope and reach of what Meadows and others stonewalling the Jan. 6 committee are so eager to cover up. But we've now learned the committee has extensive receipts, and soon enough, we'll see all of them.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on December 13, 2021, 08:28:09 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on December 13, 2021, 03:53:56 AM
I assure you I have never since used the term, "Oriental".

Of course the term, Asian, versus "Oriental", avoids any implication of outsider perspective.  Though I should say that I've heard the term, "Occidental", used non-pejoratively.

Certainly terms assume negative connotation that they did not necessarily have originally.  So the word "Negro" simply means "black" in Spanish, yet on account of use by undoubted racists especially in America, it has become repugnant, (especially in its diminutive form  :o ).

It goes without saying, I have never had any impression of racism from your participation.

Quote
You say, "But I think the bottom line is that the community came to a consensus that it wanted to chose how to refer to itself, rather than accept a label that was applied to them by others."  I guess so, so steel yourself to use Xe/Xem/Xir.

First I have heard of those, I guess I am still a cave man. We are headed for a complicated world in which everyone will have to specify what pronouns they apply to themselves. Worse things have happened. Unlike some other languages, there is no official specification of English, so we have to follow usage.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on December 13, 2021, 08:50:00 AM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on December 13, 2021, 08:28:09 AM
... We are headed for a complicated world in which everyone will have to specify what pronouns they apply to themselves. Worse things have happened. Unlike some other languages, there is no official specification of English, so we have to follow usage.

I guess they ought to add 'Preferred Pronoun' boxes to our email & 'phone Contact info -- not to mention company HR files.  ::)

But I see potential conflict between personal choice and general usage.  Suppose, say, a person doesn't want to follow general usage.  So Xi/Xem/Xir it hasn't yet entered general usage but apparently it's some folks personal preference.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 13, 2021, 09:09:18 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on December 13, 2021, 08:50:00 AM
I guess they ought to add 'Preferred Pronoun' boxes to our email & 'phone Contact info -- not to mention company HR files.  ::)

But I see potential conflict between personal choice and general usage.  Suppose, say, a person doesn't want to follow general usage.  So Xi/Xem/Xir it hasn't yet entered general usage but apparently it's some folks personal preference.

Aye. I shan't worry about Xi/Xem/Xir until /i meet someone who uses them.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on December 13, 2021, 02:40:17 PM
Well-balanced, and fair, article about Pelosi in 2022 and beyond.

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/12/12/politics/nancy-pelosi-house-democrats-leadership-2022/index.html
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 13, 2021, 04:24:13 PM
House Jan. 6 committee votes to hold Meadows in contempt for defying subpoena
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on December 14, 2021, 04:28:56 AM
Quote from: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on December 13, 2021, 02:40:17 PM
Well-balanced, and fair, article about Pelosi in 2022 and beyond.

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/12/12/politics/nancy-pelosi-house-democrats-leadership-2022/index.html
"Where do we go from here?" one member said, expressing the stress. "I don't know."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 14, 2021, 07:24:45 AM
Jennifer Rubin:

Katyal argues: "So as long as the intent was to disrupt the count, it would suffice to be criminal, which of course makes a lot of sense given the grave stakes here." What is true of these two defendants, he adds, "goes for others, including anyone in the White House who aided the disruption." He concludes that "Judge Friedrich's decision, at bottom, is a how-to manual, demonstrating how government officials, including President Trump, can be criminally indicted."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 14, 2021, 08:04:41 AM
D.C. attorney general sues Proud Boys, Oath Keepers over Jan. 6 attack
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on December 14, 2021, 03:48:01 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 14, 2021, 08:04:41 AM
D.C. attorney general sues Proud Boys, Oath Keepers over Jan. 6 attack

Well at least somebody is doing something, while that milquetoast at DOJ cowers under his desk.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: André on December 15, 2021, 06:09:27 AM
Quote from: Daverz on December 14, 2021, 03:48:01 PM
Well at least somebody is doing something, while that milquetoast at DOJ cowers under his desk.

I learned a new word today  :).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 15, 2021, 06:14:48 AM
great word, too!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 15, 2021, 06:35:41 AM
After extraordinary sacrifice, and years of delay, Alwyn Cashe gets his Medal of Honor
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on December 15, 2021, 07:55:37 AM
Quote from: André on December 15, 2021, 06:09:27 AM
I learned a new word today  :).

... A fancy way of saying wimp.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on December 15, 2021, 08:02:23 AM
Quote from: André on December 15, 2021, 06:09:27 AM
I learned a new word [milquetoast] today  :).

I knew the word, but I always thought it is written "milktoast" because that's how it sounds and I have never before seen it written, only heard people say it.  ;D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 15, 2021, 08:11:56 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on December 15, 2021, 07:55:37 AM
... A fancy way of saying wimp.

I also like the term pantywaist.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on December 15, 2021, 08:37:37 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 14, 2021, 08:04:41 AM
D.C. attorney general sues Proud Boys, Oath Keepers over Jan. 6 attack
I was delighted to hear that news à la good ole NPR!  :)

PD
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: André on December 15, 2021, 10:17:34 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on December 15, 2021, 08:02:23 AM
I knew the word, but I always thought it is written "milktoast" because that's how it sounds and I have never before seen it written, only heard people say it.  ;D

It's from a 1930s popular cartoon character, Caspar Milquetoast, The Timid Soul

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/43/Caspar_Milquetoast_Christmas_card.jpg)

These could be 2021 Xmas wishes !! 

::)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on December 16, 2021, 08:51:34 AM
Since the rest of you are, as usual, ignoring the big issues of the day, I'll ask what's on everyone's mind: Will Kanye West be indicted for election tampering in Georgia or will he let his agent take the fall?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on December 16, 2021, 08:56:59 AM
Quote from: André on December 15, 2021, 10:17:34 AM
It's from a 1930s popular cartoon character, Caspar Milquetoast, The Timid Soul

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/43/Caspar_Milquetoast_Christmas_card.jpg)

These could be 2021 Xmas wishes !! 

::)

Interesting! I believe this cartoon it totally unknown in Finland (perhaps everywhere outside the US?).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on December 16, 2021, 11:06:13 AM
Quote from: André on December 15, 2021, 10:17:34 AM
It's from a 1930s popular cartoon character, Caspar Milquetoast, The Timid Soul

I'm surprised at 71B saying he'd never seen it in writing, since I regard it as one of those typical print-only words that no one ever uses in spoken language  -  a class of words I'm particularly tickled by....

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 17, 2021, 11:16:01 AM
Fla. man sentenced to 5 years for attacking police, the longest Jan. 6 riot sentence yet

And, separately:

Judge rejects Fox News request to dismiss Dominion Voting's defamation lawsuit over election claims
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: LKB on December 17, 2021, 11:43:02 AM
Positive signs. 👍
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 23, 2021, 10:09:28 AM
Next door to an admission of guilt?

Trump asks Supreme Court to keep records from House Jan. 6 committee
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on December 23, 2021, 10:19:27 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 17, 2021, 11:16:01 AM
Fla. man sentenced to 5 years for attacking police, the longest Jan. 6 riot sentence yet



     That's the fire extinguisher guy, isn't it?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 23, 2021, 10:31:26 AM
Quote from: drogulus on December 23, 2021, 10:19:27 AM
     That's the fire extinguisher guy, isn't it?

Aye.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 24, 2021, 11:13:39 AM
Rudy Giuliani and One America News sued by Georgia poll workers falsely accused of electoral fraud
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 29, 2021, 09:25:10 AM
For US Evangelicals, it's down with Jesus, up with Trump.

Opinion: Trump idolatry has undermined religious faith


By Jennifer Rubin
Columnist

Yesterday at 1:41 p.m. EST

Much has been written about White evangelicals' central role in the fraying of democracy. More attention, however, should be paid to the damage the political movement has inflicted on religion itself.

The demographic — which remains in the throes of White grievance and an apocalyptic vision that postulates America (indeed "Western civilization") is under attack from socialists, foreigners and secularists — forms the core of the MAGA movement. Many have rejected the sanctity of elections, the principle of inclusion and even objective reality.

The consequences have been dire for American politics. The siege mentality has morphed into an ends-justify-the-means style of politics in which lies, brutal discourse and even violence are applauded as necessary to protect "real America." Essential features of democracy, such as the peaceful transfer of power, compromise with political opponents and defining America as an idea and not a racial or religious identity, have fallen by the wayside.

Sadly, the degradation of democracy has intensified in the wake of Joe Biden's victory. The doctrinal elevation of the "big lie," the increase in violent rhetoric and the effort to rig elections all reflect a heightened desperation by the MAGA crowd. This has driven the GOP to new lows (e.g., vaccine refusal to "own the libs," virtually all House Republicans defending an animation depicting the murder of a congresswoman).

While lovers of democracy around the world view these developments in horror, we should not lose track of the damage the MAGA movement has wrought to religious values. Peter Wehner, an evangelical Christian and former adviser to President George W. Bush, explains in a column for the Atlantic how a recent speech from Donald Trump Jr. reflects the inversion of religious faith. "The former president's son," Wehner writes, "has a message for the tens of millions of evangelicals who form the energized base of the GOP: the scriptures are essentially a manual for suckers. The teachings of Jesus have 'gotten us nothing.' "

Wehner continues:

It's worse than that, really; the ethic of Jesus has gotten in the way of successfully prosecuting the culture wars against the left. If the ethic of Jesus encourages sensibilities that might cause people in politics to act a little less brutally, a bit more civilly, with a touch more grace? Then it needs to go. Decency is for suckers.

Understanding this phenomenon goes a long way toward explaining the MAGA crowd's very unreligious cruelty toward immigrants, its selfish refusal to vaccinate to protect the most vulnerable and its veneration of a vulgar, misogynistic cult leader. If you wonder how so many "people of faith" can behave in such ways, understand that their "faith" has become hostile to traditional religious values such as kindness, empathy, self-restraint, grace, honesty and humility.

Robert P. Jones, who leads the Public Religion Research Institute, writes that "in the upside-down world white evangelicalism has become, the willingness to act in self-sacrificial ways for the sake of vulnerable others — even amid a global pandemic — has become rare, even antithetical, to an aggressive, rights-asserting white Christian culture." The result is reckless self-indulgence that places some evangelicals' own aversion to "being told what to do" ahead of the health and lives of vulnerable populations.

Jones explains:

White evangelicals remain the most vaccine resistant of any major religious group, with one quarter (25%) refusing vaccination (compared to only 13% of the country). And these refusal rates are not all tied to theological objections. Only 13% of white evangelicals say the teachings of their religion prohibit receiving a vaccine, a rate comparable to the general public (10%).

Strikingly, the evidence suggests churches and pastors are the heart of the problem. White evangelicals who attend religious services regularly are twice as likely as less frequent attenders to be vaccine refusers (30% vs. 15%). If ever there were clear evidence of a massive abdication of pastoral responsibility and leadership, this is it.


As self-identified evangelicals reject small inconveniences and show disdain for others' lives, Jones observes, "there is no hint of awareness that their actions are a mockery of the central biblical injunction to care for the orphan, the widow, the stranger, and the vulnerable among us."

In sum, while the White evangelical political movement has done immeasurable damage to our democracy, its descent into MAGA politics, conspiratorial thinking and cult worship has had catastrophic results for the religious values evangelicals once held dear. Jones writes: "It's important to say this straight. This refusal to act to protect the vulnerable — particularly because of the low personal costs involved — is raw, callous selfishness. Exhibited by people I love, it is heartbreaking. Expressed by people who claim to be followers of Jesus, it is maddening."

If these trends continue uninterrupted, we will wind up with a country rooted in neither democratic principles nor religious values. That would be a mean, violent and intolerant future few of us would want to experience.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on December 29, 2021, 12:56:03 PM
Karl: have you encountered Kristen Kobes Du Mez's book Jesus and John Wayne?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 29, 2021, 01:17:36 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on December 29, 2021, 12:56:03 PM
Karl: have you encountered Kristen Kobes Du Mez's book Jesus and John Wayne?


I don't think I have.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on December 29, 2021, 01:43:17 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 29, 2021, 01:17:36 PM
I don't think I have.

I haven't read the book yet, but have heard a number of interviews with the author where she makes a compelling case that Trump's piggishness was a feature not a bug for the evangelicals, and was entirely in keeping with decades of evangelicals opinion on rugged masculinity, hierarchy and nationalism. None of which ever had much connection to the actual Bible, and certainly not to the actual Jesus who they've always viewed as some kind of Rambo figure.

There's a particularly thorough 2-hour interview on The Dig podcast where she goes right through the history of evangelical thought in the twentieth century, leading quite directly to all of Trumps worst characteristics. She make it clear they weren't holding their noses when they were voting.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 29, 2021, 01:47:43 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on December 29, 2021, 01:43:17 PM
I haven't read the book yet, but have heard a number of interviews with the author where she makes a compelling case that Trump's piggishness was a feature not a bug for the evangelicals, and was entirely in keeping with decades of evangelicals opinion on rugged masculinity, hierarchy and nationalism. None of which ever had much connection to the actual Bible, and certainly not to the actual Jesus who they've always viewed as some kind of Rambo figure.

There's a particularly thorough 2-hour interview on The Dig podcast where she goes right through the history of evangelical thought in the twentieth century, leading quite directly to all of Trumps worst characteristics. She make it clear they weren't holding their noses when they were voting.

No, indeed.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 29, 2021, 03:15:04 PM
Ghislaine Maxwell convicted of helping Jeffrey Epstein sexually abuse teenage girls
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on December 31, 2021, 01:04:08 PM
It gives me no pleasure to share this:

Next Year Will Be Worse (https://thetriad.thebulwark.com/p/next-year-will-be-worse)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on January 01, 2022, 09:34:29 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 31, 2021, 01:04:08 PM
It gives me no pleasure to share this:

Next Year Will Be Worse (https://thetriad.thebulwark.com/p/next-year-will-be-worse)

Not being an American voter I don't presume to speculate whether Kevin McCarthy will be Republican majority leader, but I am pretty sure Republicans will regain the House and Senate ...

In the curdest vernacular, American democracy will be effed in the rectum if that happens.  I wouldn't feel so bad about that if were just you guys, but the effects will be dire for the rest of the world as well.

With Republican-dominated state legislatures controlling the election process, US democracy is already in the "managed" category.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 04, 2022, 12:13:09 PM
Opinion: The smoking gun that Liz Cheney is looking for on Trump comes into view

By Greg Sargent
Columnist
Today at 10:45 a.m. EST

For weeks, Rep. Liz Cheney has hinted that the House select committee examining Jan. 6 might urge the Justice Department to consider prosecuting Donald Trump. The grounds for this criminal referral might be that Trump obstructed the "official proceeding" in which Congress counts presidential electors.

Now we're able to glean a clearer sense of what the Wyoming Republican has in mind. It provides a peek at the smoking gun that Cheney and the committee are searching for — or one of them, anyway.

The core of the matter is this: For more than two hours, Trump watched his supporters wage a violent assault on the seat of U.S. government for the purpose of disrupting the 2020 election's conclusion, after having incited them to commit that disruption, and didn't call them off.

Some comments from Cheney herself — and clarification I've now obtained from a Cheney spokesman — shed new light on where this is going. The short version: It's likely the committee will explore recommending changes to federal law to further clarify that obstructing the electoral count in Congress is a crime subject to stiff penalties.

This is an idea worth considering. It would be another step toward securing our political system against a future Jan. 6. It would raise the question of whether Republicans would support such a move.

On Sunday, Cheney told ABC News that Trump's failure to call off his mob constituted a "dereliction of duty." She noted that at any point, Trump could have gone on TV and urged the mob to stop, but didn't. Cheney added:

I think one of the things the committee needs to look at — we're looking at a legislative purpose — is whether we need enhanced penalties for that kind of dereliction of duty.

I asked a Cheney spokesman for clarification of this. "The committee will explore whether to make changes to current law to hold a future president accountable," he told me, without elaborating. "That's part of the legislative purpose of the committee."

Now note that Cheney has repeatedly suggested the committee is examining whether Trump, in refusing to talk down the mob, might have done so as part of a deliberate effort to obstruct Congress' counting of electors.

The committee is reportedly looking at whether to make that the basis for recommending criminal prosecution. The grounds would be that it violated federal law barring obstruction of an "official proceeding."

Determining whether Trump's conduct constituted such a violation is complicated. It might require determining whether Trump saw the violence as instrumentally helpful in subverting the electoral count, and deliberately refrained from calling off the attack to serve that express goal.

The committee has established that numerous Republicans frantically urged Trump to call off the riot, even as he enjoyed watching it all unfold on TV. Journalist Jon Karl reports that Trump didn't take at least one of their calls.

The committee wants to determine whether Trump indicated a desire to see the mob continue disrupting the electoral count. We don't know if it will prove this.

Then there's the question of whether disrupting the electoral count constitutes obstructing an official proceeding, and whether Trump, in inciting the mob to descend on the Capitol during that count, participated in that obstruction. We don't know exactly what we'll learn there, either.

But beyond that, we can now surmise where this will likely go: Precisely because the statute is murky on these points, the committee will likely recommend changes to it that make it clearer that disrupting the electoral count is a federal crime, and further penalize it.

Reform to prevent another Jan. 6

This is an idea worth talking about, and NYU law professor Ryan Goodman says it's legally doable.

"It would be valuable for the committee to deliver recommendations for strengthening the federal criminal code to protect against obstruction of the electoral count," Goodman told me. Such a reform, he added, would ensure that "criminal law fully deals with efforts to disrupt" that count, which "could help deter future threats to our democracy."

Goodman said the committee could recommend this while avoiding implying that Trump's conduct did not violate current statute. It could recommend "enhancing the criminal penalties for obstructing the electoral count."

This would write an explicit protection against obstructing the electoral count into the law, Goodman said, but without undercutting the idea that "obstruction of congressional proceedings is already criminal."

This goal would undercut the Republican talking point that the committee lacks no real legislative purpose and is illegitimate. Mulling such a reform is obviously a legitimate legislative purpose, as is mulling reform of the Electoral Count Act.

In an important sense, we already have our smoking gun. As Cheney told ABC News:

We have firsthand testimony that his daughter Ivanka went in at least twice to ask him to please stop this violence.

Any man who would not do so, any man who would provoke a violent assault on the Capitol to stop the counting of electoral votes, any man who would watch television as police officers were being beaten, as his supporters were invading the Capitol of the United States, is clearly unfit for future office, clearly can never be anywhere near the Oval Office ever again.


How many congressional Republicans would agree with this statement? How is it possible that the answer is: Very few?

This is why it will be interesting to see if Republicans will support strengthening the criminal code against disruption of the electoral count, and whether a certain pair of Democratic senators will support ending the filibuster to pass such a safeguard.

We may soon get answers to those questions. And they probably won't be to our liking.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on January 05, 2022, 03:57:05 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on January 04, 2022, 12:13:09 PM
Opinion: The smoking gun that Liz Cheney is looking for on Trump comes into view

By Greg Sargent
Columnist
Today at 10:45 a.m. EST
...
On Sunday, Cheney told ABC News that Trump's failure to call off his mob constituted a "dereliction of duty." She noted that at any point, Trump could have gone on TV and urged the mob to stop, but didn't. Cheney added:

I think one of the things the committee needs to look at — we're looking at a legislative purpose — is whether we need enhanced penalties for that kind of dereliction of duty.
...
The committee wants to determine whether Trump indicated a desire to see the mob continue disrupting the electoral count. We don't know if it will prove this.

What seems clear to me is that Trump's failure for hours to intervene or take appropriate to control violent rioters attacking Congress is clear factual dereliction of duty, the obvious remedy for which is impeachment, (assuming impeachment is legally possible after the President's term has expired).

That dereliction is quite apart from proving whether, in fact, Trump actually incited the mob action in the first place.  I'm not sure why additional legislation should be necessary, but I'm not clear on the American legal system.

But what does seem clear to me is that Trump-supporting Republicans would thwart the legislation as they certainly would another impeachment of Trump.

What is also clear to me is that large segments of the GOP have become a fascist conspiracy to destroy American democracy, (such as it presently is).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 05, 2022, 08:46:12 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on January 05, 2022, 03:57:05 AM
What seems clear to me is that Trump's failure for hours to intervene or take appropriate to control violent rioters attacking Congress is clear factual dereliction of duty, the obvious remedy for which is impeachment, (assuming impeachment is legally possible after the President's term has expired).
Hence Trump's second impeachment, from which the complicit GOP Senators acquitted him. The Constitution's checks and balances don't function when you have a gallery full of bad-faith actors. Democracy in the US is in a depressing tailspin.

QuoteThat dereliction is quite apart from proving whether, in fact, Trump actually incited the mob action in the first place.  I'm not sure why additional legislation should be necessary, but I'm not clear on the American legal system.

But what does seem clear to me is that Trump-supporting Republicans would thwart the legislation as they certainly would another impeachment of Trump.

What is also clear to me is that large segments of the GOP have become a fascist conspiracy to destroy American democracy, (such as it presently is).

The action at this point is not more legislation, but prosecutions by the Dept of Justice.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on January 05, 2022, 09:27:29 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on January 05, 2022, 08:46:12 AMThe action at this point is not more legislation, but prosecutions by the Dept of Justice.

We are at the sorry point where prosecutors are afraid that prosecution of Trump and enablers of his attempt to nullify the election result would appear partisan and tend to push more conspiracy minded people into the Trump camp.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 05, 2022, 10:36:40 AM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on January 05, 2022, 09:27:29 AM
We are at the sorry point where prosecutors are afraid that prosecution of Trump and enablers of his attempt to nullify the election result would appear partisan and tend to push more conspiracy minded people into the Trump camp.



Yes. Triumph of the bad actors.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on January 05, 2022, 11:31:06 AM
Oh Jeez.  ::) He obstructed an official proceeding not only by failing to call off the deluded hoard, he did so by inciting the mob and planning and helping to execute a freaking coup.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 05, 2022, 04:49:31 PM
Here's hoping:

Garland: DOJ will hold those responsible for Jan. 6 riot accountable, whether they were present or committed other crimes
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 06, 2022, 06:33:04 AM
Opinion: Merrick Garland has shown that he's taking Jan. 6 seriously. But the public's patience is limited.

By Jennifer Rubin
Columnist

Today at 7:45 a.m. EST

Attorney General Merrick Garland delivered a speech on Wednesday in part to allay fears that he is unwilling or unable to pursue all those responsible for the coup attempt. While he could have been more explicit regarding events leading up to the Jan. 6 insurrection, the speech succeeded in reassuring the public that no one will be given a free pass.

Several passages certainly should inspire confidence that he will investigate everyone involved in Jan. 6. The department, he insisted, "remains committed to holding all Jan. 6 perpetrators, at any level, accountable under law — whether they were present that day or were otherwise criminally responsible for the assault on our democracy." By stressing that people need not have been physically present, he leaves open the possibility that, for example, the former president or his coup plotters at the Willard hotel might be charged.

Indeed, he declared: "Proceedings in both chambers [for the counting of electoral votes on Jan. 6] were disrupted for hours — interfering with a fundamental element of American democracy: the peaceful transfer of power from one administration to the next. Those involved must be held accountable, and there is no higher priority for us at the Department of Justice." This seems to echo the legal theory advanced by Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) that Trump is guilty of "obstruction of Congress," which would not require proof that Trump is responsible for violence to succeed in court.

Garland also went into detail to explain the magnitude of the case — the hundred of arrests made, the thousand of hours of video reviewed, the size of the prosecutorial team. In so doing, he demonstrated that the Justice Department has not yet made its way through the lowest-level offenders. "The actions we have taken thus far will not be our last," he vowed, adding, "We follow the physical evidence. We follow the digital evidence. We follow the money. But most important, we follow the facts ― not an agenda or an assumption."

One could also take comfort in his thorough debunking of the notion that the insurrection was nonviolent. He detailed the injuries, the deaths and the weapons, drawing a line to the gradual normalization of violence and threats of violence in the last year. He recounted the increase in violence and threats made against public officials, from election workers to judges to members of Congress — and even airline attendants.

The prosecution of violent crimes is not, as some Republicans outlandishly claim, an effort to thwart parents from complaining about school boards. As Garland explained, "Peacefully expressing a view or ideology — no matter how extreme — is protected by the First Amendment. But illegally threatening to harm or kill another person is not. There is no First Amendment right to unlawfully threaten to harm or kill someone." Anyone who says otherwise is attempting to reset norms that insist on nonviolence as a necessary foundation for democracy.

He also spent time on voting rights, forcefully urging Congress to act to ensure that every eligible voter can cast a ballot that counts. He made clear that without new legislation, the department cannot uphold the sacred right to vote. But this must include not only reforms to guarantee access to voting but also to prevent the subversion of elections — including antics such as those leading up to Jan. 6 and state laws that Republicans are contemplating to displace impartial election workers.

Indeed, Garland could have been much more explicit about the nonviolent elements of the coup attempt that took place before Jan. 6. He did not talk about Donald Trump's attempts to strong-arm the Georgia secretary of state or to lean on Michigan election officials. He did not discuss the former president's unacceptable pressure on Justice Department officials to declare the election fraudulent. And he did not talk about schemes to have the vice president violate his oath and stop the electoral vote count, although he did make generic promises to "defend our democratic institutions from attack."

The proof will come as the investigation runs its course. Will the former president and his cronies suffer any price for the nonviolent aspects of the attempt to overthrow the election? If not, the next John Eastman memo might be more successful. That is, Trump or some other wannabe authoritarian might use obviously disingenuous readings of the Constitution and federal laws to allow a candidate to block a legitimate winner from assuming office.

Garland's speech should buy him some goodwill and time among defenders of democracy. But the public's indulgence is not unlimited. If the facts support prosecution of Trump and his immediate circle for obstruction of Congress, violent or nonviolent, Garland will be hard-pressed not to proceed.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on January 09, 2022, 06:05:07 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on January 06, 2022, 06:33:04 AM
Opinion: Merrick Garland has shown that he's taking Jan. 6 seriously. But the public's patience is limited.

By Jennifer Rubin
Columnist

Today at 7:45 a.m. EST

Attorney General Merrick Garland delivered a speech on Wednesday in part to allay fears that he is unwilling or unable to pursue all those responsible for the coup attempt. While he could have been more explicit regarding events leading up to the Jan. 6 insurrection, the speech succeeded in reassuring the public that no one will be given a free pass.

Several passages certainly should inspire confidence that he will investigate everyone involved in Jan. 6. The department, he insisted, "remains committed to holding all Jan. 6 perpetrators, at any level, accountable under law — whether they were present that day or were otherwise criminally responsible for the assault on our democracy." By stressing that people need not have been physically present, he leaves open the possibility that, for example, the former president or his coup plotters at the Willard hotel might be charged.

Indeed, he declared: "Proceedings in both chambers [for the counting of electoral votes on Jan. 6] were disrupted for hours — interfering with a fundamental element of American democracy: the peaceful transfer of power from one administration to the next. Those involved must be held accountable, and there is no higher priority for us at the Department of Justice." This seems to echo the legal theory advanced by Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) that Trump is guilty of "obstruction of Congress," which would not require proof that Trump is responsible for violence to succeed in court.

Garland also went into detail to explain the magnitude of the case — the hundred of arrests made, the thousand of hours of video reviewed, the size of the prosecutorial team. In so doing, he demonstrated that the Justice Department has not yet made its way through the lowest-level offenders. "The actions we have taken thus far will not be our last," he vowed, adding, "We follow the physical evidence. We follow the digital evidence. We follow the money. But most important, we follow the facts ― not an agenda or an assumption."

One could also take comfort in his thorough debunking of the notion that the insurrection was nonviolent. He detailed the injuries, the deaths and the weapons, drawing a line to the gradual normalization of violence and threats of violence in the last year. He recounted the increase in violence and threats made against public officials, from election workers to judges to members of Congress — and even airline attendants.

The prosecution of violent crimes is not, as some Republicans outlandishly claim, an effort to thwart parents from complaining about school boards. As Garland explained, "Peacefully expressing a view or ideology — no matter how extreme — is protected by the First Amendment. But illegally threatening to harm or kill another person is not. There is no First Amendment right to unlawfully threaten to harm or kill someone." Anyone who says otherwise is attempting to reset norms that insist on nonviolence as a necessary foundation for democracy.

He also spent time on voting rights, forcefully urging Congress to act to ensure that every eligible voter can cast a ballot that counts. He made clear that without new legislation, the department cannot uphold the sacred right to vote. But this must include not only reforms to guarantee access to voting but also to prevent the subversion of elections — including antics such as those leading up to Jan. 6 and state laws that Republicans are contemplating to displace impartial election workers.

Indeed, Garland could have been much more explicit about the nonviolent elements of the coup attempt that took place before Jan. 6. He did not talk about Donald Trump's attempts to strong-arm the Georgia secretary of state or to lean on Michigan election officials. He did not discuss the former president's unacceptable pressure on Justice Department officials to declare the election fraudulent. And he did not talk about schemes to have the vice president violate his oath and stop the electoral vote count, although he did make generic promises to "defend our democratic institutions from attack."

The proof will come as the investigation runs its course. Will the former president and his cronies suffer any price for the nonviolent aspects of the attempt to overthrow the election? If not, the next John Eastman memo might be more successful. That is, Trump or some other wannabe authoritarian might use obviously disingenuous readings of the Constitution and federal laws to allow a candidate to block a legitimate winner from assuming office.

Garland's speech should buy him some goodwill and time among defenders of democracy. But the public's indulgence is not unlimited. If the facts support prosecution of Trump and his immediate circle for obstruction of Congress, violent or nonviolent, Garland will be hard-pressed not to proceed.
It feels like the damage is done and can't be undone - not as long as Dems fall behind. Everyone seems to say they'll lose ground next year. They have the justice dept., but there's so much pressure from the other side. They need some smoking guns that can't be explained away. If trump gets near the presidency again we're doomed. But there could be someone even worse around the corner.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 09, 2022, 08:21:37 AM
Quote from: milk on January 09, 2022, 06:05:07 AM
It feels like the damage is done and can't be undone - not as long as Dems fall behind. Everyone seems to say they'll lose ground next year. They have the justice dept., but there's so much pressure from the other side. They need some smoking guns that can't be explained away. If trump gets near the presidency again we're doomed. But there could be someone even worse around the corner.

Wish I could say you're wrong, but I cannot.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 10, 2022, 06:43:29 AM
The only way to keep Trump out of the White House, is to immure him in the Big House. This would also be a deterrent to the the lesser autocrat wannabes. But dare one hope for it?

Opinion: Garland's caution is an asset when it comes to holding Trump accountable

By E.J. Dionne Jr.
Columnist

Yesterday at 9:00 a.m. EST

Two speeches last week, one from President Biden, the other from Attorney General Merrick Garland, should be reassuring to those who want justice and accountability for the violent events of Jan. 6, 2021 — and Donald Trump's efforts to stage a coup.

But the remarks were reassuring in different ways. And not everyone who welcomed Biden's direct and eloquent indictment of Trump and his apologists within the Republican Party felt as warmly about Garland's studiously restrained promise to "follow the facts — not an agenda or an assumption."

The stark differences in tone and content can be explained straightforwardly: Biden's tasks are, by the broadest definition, political. Garland's task is precisely to keep politics out of prosecutorial decisions.

Biden's bracing speech from the site of the attack showed he understands that he had no alternative but to confront, publicly and forcefully, the metastasizing anti-democratic movement ignited by Trump's lies about the 2020 election.

And this week in Atlanta, both Biden and Vice President Harris will speak out for federal legislation to counter one of the dangerous outgrowths of that movement: the attack on voting rights in many Republican-led states.

Garland's responsibilities are structurally more complicated because he has both a policy role and a prosecutorial function.

In his speech, Garland was forceful on policy. He detailed the ongoing attacks on the right to vote and how Supreme Court decisions had "drastically weakened" the Justice Department's ability to contain them. It was "essential," Garland argued, "that Congress act to give the department the powers we need to ensure that every eligible voter can cast a vote that counts."

But when it comes to the possibility of prosecuting Trump, we should welcome the fact that Garland is not talking about what, if anything, he is doing. Recall that progressives and Democrats were rightly enraged in 2019 when then-Attorney General William P. Barr publicly distorted the findings of special counsel Robert S. Mueller III's inquiry and quickly dismissed the prospect of prosecuting Trump.

They were also angry when then-FBI Director James B. Comey, in announcing his 2016 decision not to prosecute Hillary Clinton in connection with her use of a private email server, also (inappropriately) chose to go on and on about the case. He criticized Clinton, during the presidential campaign, for being "extremely careless" and called her use of a private server "especially concerning."

Comey's job in the Clinton case was in law enforcement, not commentary. The same is true of Garland where Trump is concerned. Yes, the attorney general could announce that he is investigating Trump — if he is. But given how extraordinary indicting a former president would be, are we not better off with the standard Garland articulated? "We will and we must speak," he said, "through our work."

Nonetheless, Garland does have to take seriously not only that Trump clearly abused his power but also that he might have done so in a criminal way. Writing in The Post last August, legal scholars Laurence H. Tribe, Barbara McQuade and Joyce White Vance itemized potential crimes Trump may have committed in the course of his efforts to overturn the election.

They included defrauding the United States by interfering with governmental functions, obstruction of an official proceeding, racketeering, inciting insurrection and seditious conspiracy. Trump might also have violated the federal voter fraud statute and coerced federal employees to violate the Hatch Act, which limits the political activities of civil servants.

In deciding what to do about Trump's offenses, Garland confronts two concerns that are legitimate — and in tension. There is genuine worry about what it would mean for the U.S. democratic system if a former president were indicted by the administration of his successor — a successor who had defeated him at the polls. But ex-presidents, like everyone else, need to be held accountable for crimes.

In a balancing test, accountability should prevail, and we should remember that it's Republicans who, in opposing Trump's impeachment, argued that he could face criminal indictment after he left office.

"We have a criminal justice system in this country," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said last February. "We have civil litigation. And former presidents are not immune from being held accountable by either one."

My hope is that Garland takes the words of the man who unfairly blocked his way to the Supreme Court seriously and investigates whether Trump violated the law. Similarly, the House investigators into the events of Jan. 6 should make criminal referrals to the Justice Department if they find evidence that Trump broke federal statutes.

But if Trump is to be indicted, we are better off with an attorney general who is widely seen as cautious, not reckless. Garland is committed to the idea that "there cannot be different rules depending on one's political party or affiliation ... different rules for friends and foes ... different rules for the powerful and the powerless." When you think about it, that's the antithesis of Trumpism.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on January 10, 2022, 08:36:37 AM
In addition to the Justice Dept and the AG of NY, the AG of Georgia could and should put him away for crimes we've all heard recordings of him committing.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 10, 2022, 11:14:16 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on January 10, 2022, 08:36:37 AM
In addition to the Justice Dept and the AG of NY, the AG of Georgia could and should put him away for crimes we've all heard recordings of him committing.

True, too.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 11, 2022, 12:41:17 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on January 04, 2022, 12:13:09 PM
Opinion: The smoking gun that Liz Cheney is looking for on Trump comes into view


Some comments from Cheney herself — and clarification I've now obtained from a Cheney spokesman — shed new light on where this is going. The short version: It's likely the committee will explore recommending changes to federal law to further clarify that obstructing the electoral count in Congress is a crime subject to stiff penalties.

This is an idea worth considering. It would be another step toward securing our political system against a future Jan. 6. It would raise the question of whether Republicans would support such a move.



The answer to this question is pretty clear, way in advance.
If Trump were to be barred from political office the J6 crowd would be furious and political violence would be a feature of American life for many years to come.
Many of these people are armed to the gills and they are addicted to this notion that Trump will lead them (back) to an all-white America.
By and large this is a matter of mental issues, many of these people are constitutionally aggrieved and nothing will satisfy them. It's what Goebbels termed Totale Krieg. An endless war against perceived wrongs, so as never having to face that ugly mirror.
I suspect this is what has been giving Merrick Garland and Biden paws thus far.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on January 11, 2022, 12:02:29 PM
Quote from: Herman on January 11, 2022, 12:41:17 AM
The answer to this question is pretty clear, way in advance.
If Trump were to be barred from political office the J6 crowd would be furious and political violence would be a feature of American life for many years to come.
Many of these people are armed to the gills and they are addicted to this notion that Trump will lead them (back) to an all-white America.
By and large this is a matter of mental issues, many of these people are constitutionally aggrieved and nothing will satisfy them. It's what Goebbels termed Totale Krieg. An endless war against perceived wrongs, so as never having to face that ugly mirror.
I suspect this is what has been giving Merrick Garland and Biden paws thus far.

I think the House investigation will be stretched out past the '22 election after which, with Republicans almost certainly regaining control of House and Senate, it will be shut down as a "witch hunt".  There is no chance such new legislation could be passed.

Speaking of new laws, as I hear state legislatures are busy passing them to restrict voting options and penalizing election officials who don't enforce the new measures.  Also, honest Republicans such as the Georgia State Secretary who refused overturn valid '02 election results are being forced from office.  Who watched CNN's Special Report by Fareed Zakaria last Sunday?

Americans need wake up to the fact that their Federal Government is simply not democratic, neither in effect nor by intent of the US Constitution.  It's been a long time since Republicans actually had a nation-wide popular majority.  Constitutional defects include the Senate by state rather than population, the Electoral College given winner-take all in most stated, but most all partisan State control of the Districts, voter registration, and the election process.  Major Constitutional changes would be necessary but that is effectively impossible:  this means the American democracy is buggered.  Sorry, guys.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 11, 2022, 03:40:11 PM
Quote from: Fëanor on January 11, 2022, 12:02:29 PM
I think the House investigation will be stretched out past the '22 election after which, with Republicans almost certainly regaining control of House and Senate, it will be shut down as a "witch hunt".  There is no chance such new legislation could be passed.

Speaking of new laws, as I hear state legislatures are busy passing them to restrict voting options and penalizing election officials who don't enforce the new measures.  Also, honest Republicans such as the Georgia State Secretary who refused overturn valid '02 election results are being forced from office.  Who watched CNN's Special Report by Fareed Zakaria last Sunday?

Americans need wake up to the fact that their Federal Government is simply not democratic, neither in effect nor by intent of the US Constitution.  It's been a long time since Republicans actually had a nation-wide popular majority.  Constitutional defects include the Senate by state rather than population, the Electoral College given winner-take all in most stated, but most all partisan State control of the Districts, voter registration, and the election process.  Major Constitutional changes would be necessary but that is effectively impossible:  this means the American democracy is buggered.  Sorry, guys.

You're pretty much spot on.

And the Democrats' silly bickering and infighting continues:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-01-11/biden-calls-on-senate-to-change-rules-to-pass-voting-rights-bill

Biden Demands Voting-Rights Action as Allies Rip 'Empty Gesture'

President Joe Biden called on the U.S. Senate to change its rules to allow a simple majority to pass voting rights legislation, saying in Atlanta that GOP-backed state laws threaten democracy.

"The threat to our democracy so grave, we must find a way to pass these voting rights bill, debate them, vote," Biden said Tuesday at Morehouse College, after visiting the crypt of Martin Luther King Jr. and the church where he was a pastor, Ebenezer Baptist. "Let the majority prevail."

His visit came amid a growing backlash from voting-rights advocates who accused the president of leaving the issue on the back burner until now to focus on his economic agenda. Some activists released an open letter dismissing his appearance as "an empty gesture, without concrete action," while the Democratic Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams skipped events Tuesday with Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris.
...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on January 11, 2022, 03:53:09 PM
Quote from: Fëanor on January 11, 2022, 12:02:29 PM


Americans need wake up to the fact that their Federal Government is simply not democratic, neither in effect nor by intent of the US Constitution.  It's been a long time since Republicans actually had a nation-wide popular majority.  Constitutional defects include the Senate by state rather than population, the Electoral College given winner-take all in most stated, but most all partisan State control of the Districts, voter registration, and the election process.  Major Constitutional changes would be necessary but that is effectively impossible:  this means the American democracy is buggered.  Sorry, guys.

It is not quite simple like that.
Also, upper legislative chambers in a majority of federal  nations are represented by regional units.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on January 12, 2022, 03:45:11 AM
Quote from: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on January 11, 2022, 03:53:09 PM
Quote from: Fëanor on January 11, 2022, 12:02:29 PM
...
Americans need wake up to the fact that their Federal Government is simply not democratic, neither in effect nor by intent of the US Constitution.  It's been a long time since Republicans actually had a nation-wide popular majority.  Constitutional defects include the Senate by state rather than population, the Electoral College given winner-take all in most stated, but most all partisan State control of the Districts, voter registration, and the election process.  Major Constitutional changes would be necessary but that is effectively impossible:  this means the American democracy is buggered.  Sorry, guys.

It is not quite simple like that.
Also, upper legislative chambers in a majority of federal  nations are represented by regional units.

Well close enough, but I understand why many Americans would be taken aback given the chauvinistic public education they received and likely continue to receive.

To say "the United States is a republic not a democracy", as I heard hundreds of time is true but not self-justifying.  It was a mistake not to make the Federal government reflect nation-wide popular choice.  Granted, there were historical reasons for this when the Constitution was framed.

One reason was that things like education, health care, and infrastructure were not then as important as they are today.  You will note that the USA within just a 2-3 decades got into Federal-state disputes regarding banking and roads.

But the large reason for the Constitutional flaw was American colonies had be separately and haphazardly found, and were for a long time internally self-governing.  Each colony had developed its own elites and powers-that-be that were jealous of their independent powers, and self-interestedly unwilling to give up their power to a central government.

Regarding upper chambers, yes, some places have them based on regional representation.  Canada is nominally like this, but the size of regional representations in our case is roughly proportional to population size.  As for the USA, it's grotesque that Wyoming has the two Senate seats the same as California with 65x the population.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 13, 2022, 11:26:31 AM
Head of Oath Keepers militia group charged with seditious conspiracy in Jan. 6 Capitol attack
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 16, 2022, 02:09:45 PM
Opinion: Distinguished pol of the week: Merrick Garland's boldest move yet

By Jennifer Rubin
Columnist

Today at 7:45 a.m. EST

Attorney General Merrick Garland has faced tough criticism over his perceived timidity. Those concerns were wrong as he made clear this past week.

The Justice Department revealed massive indictments of members of the Oath Keepers, a far-right extremist group, for their participation in the Jan. 6 insurrection. A total of 19 individuals have been charged with "corruptly obstructing an official proceeding," referring to Congress's tabulation of electoral votes. Eleven of them also face charges of seditious conspiracy, which can carry a penalty of up to 20 years in prison, as well as other charges, such as preventing an officer from performing his duties and tampering with official documents.

Both the seditious conspiracy and the obstruction charges dramatically ratchet up of the investigation. It also poses a serious threat to former president Donald Trump and his top cronies.

The seditious conspiracy charge alleges that Oath Keeper founder and leader Elmer Stewart Rhodes III "conspired with his co-defendants and others to oppose by force the execution of the laws governing the transfer of presidential power by Jan. 20, 2021." The purpose of the conspiracy, the indictment alleges, was to prevent by force "the lawful transfer of presidential power. ... in an effort to prevent, hinder and delay the certification of the electoral college vote."

The complaint enumerates a long list of actions that bolster the conspiracy charges, including encrypted communications, gathering and transporting weapons, recruiting and training teams, and using social media to communicate with co-conspirators. Its description of the group's accumulated arsenal and paramilitary attack removes any doubt this was some nonviolent protest.

Most of the Oath Keepers have pleaded not guilty to the obstruction charges. Two have pleaded guilty and are cooperating with investigators. Rhodes has repeatedly denied wrongdoing.

The seriousness of the crimes alleged and the substantial criminal penalties involved would be news enough. But there are four other reasons they matter, especially for Trump, his cronies and any members of Congress who may have been implicated in the plot to prevent Joe Biden from assuming the presidency.

First, and most importantly, this is the first time the Justice Department has identified the assault on the Capitol as sedition. Trump apologists had long argued that this was not a "coup" or effort to upset the government. The indictment argues otherwise. Seeking to disrupt the counting of the electoral votes is, if the indictment holds, sedition. And conspiracy to commit that crime is a serious offense entailing long prison terms. By invoking that charge against coup plotters, Garland makes clear he is following up the chain and will look at actions preceding Jan. 6.

Second, Section 3 of the 14th Amendment disqualifies elected officials from holding federal office if they "have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof." Federal law also states that "whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States."

The facts alleged in the seditious conspiracy charge — the attempt to prevent the lawful transfer of power — certainly relate to Section 3. While the mechanism for enforcing this is uncertain, the Justice Department has moved into territory in which Trump and congressional allies could be disqualified from office. One can imagine a flood of lawsuits and proposals for Congress to disqualify those shown to be part of the conspiracy.

Third, the indictment plainly lays out a legal avenue for indicting Trump and his cronies should the facts warrant. Trump's involvement in the plot to storm the Capitol — including his incitement, his failure to halt it once underway and any attempts by aides to coordinate with the Oath Keepers — could implicate him in the seditious conspiracy. Prosecutors would need to show he made an agreement with at least some conspirators, although it would not be necessary to prove he conspired directly with the Oath Keepers.

Fourth, even more threatening to Trump is the indictment's charge of conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, which does not require prosecutors to prove use of force or violence. The law applies to anyone whoever "corruptly . . . otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so." The interference with the counting of the electoral college votes, in the eyes of the Justice Department, amounts to corruptly obstructing an official proceeding. This might include nonviolent acts such as propounding the "big lie," pressuring then-Vice President Mike Pence to reject electoral votes, cajoling the Justice Department to discredit the election and implicitly threatening Brad Raffensperger, Georgia's secretary of state, if he did not "find" enough votes to hand the state to Trump.

The indictment is an aggressive and bold step forward that, based on already available evidence, might snare Trump. Of course, a prosecutor would have to prove all elements beyond a reasonable doubt. With such serious charges pending against the Oath Keepers, the chance to "flip" them and reveal higher-ups involved in the plot increases substantially.

For staying true to his word to follow the facts and elevating the seriousness of the charges, we can say, well done Mr. Attorney General.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on January 18, 2022, 11:48:04 AM
Fascinating data for anyone who might be interested.
(15k men and 3k women surveyed)

(https://i0.wp.com/knowingless.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/politicalsexorientation2.jpg?resize=768%2C722&ssl=1)

(https://i0.wp.com/knowingless.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/politicalsexorientationwomen.jpg?resize=768%2C722&ssl=1)

https://knowingless.com/2021/10/26/political-compass-fetishes/amp/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OaEHL3LPaf8



edit:
Also of note:
QuoteSurprisingly, I found basically no correlation with age and location on the graph (except for maybe liblefts being younger if you squint). This makes me feel slightly unsettled, as I had a lot of weight on "political orientation is stratified by age."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 18, 2022, 04:20:40 PM
House Jan. 6 committee subpoenas Giuliani, Sidney Powell
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 18, 2022, 06:42:09 PM
That fetish graph scores pretty high on the list of most trivial and yet disgusting things posted by the usual suspect.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on January 18, 2022, 09:15:15 PM
Quote from: Herman on January 18, 2022, 06:42:09 PM
That fetish graph scores pretty high on the list of most trivial and yet disgusting things posted by the usual suspect.
Of course most of them are disgusting.
But I see you have no curiosity about the connection between psychology and politics.
It's a strong inner driving force underneath, guiding the directions taken by people in politics.
What's trivial are the insignificant daily news of random politicians that people will forget about a month from now.
But both are fine.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on January 18, 2022, 10:41:32 PM
Quote from: Herman on January 18, 2022, 06:42:09 PM
That fetish graph scores pretty high on the list of most trivial and yet disgusting things posted by the usual suspect.

Of course the graph is complete bullshit.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on January 19, 2022, 01:51:54 AM
Quote from: Daverz on January 18, 2022, 10:41:32 PM
Of course the graph is complete bullshit.

that was my main objection, which is why I said 'trivial'.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 19, 2022, 03:47:08 AM
Wait...choking and asphyxiation isn't a famously politically and economically centrist desire?

Women don't really have a fetish for "creepy crawlies"?


Greg: your credulousness for this utterly made up  infantile rubbish betrays a complete lack of exposure to the real world and real people. Displaying that ignorance should embarrass you.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: LKB on January 19, 2022, 04:23:40 AM
Quote from: Daverz on January 18, 2022, 10:41:32 PM
Of course the graph is complete bullshit.

It could have been worse, but fortunately l saw neither banjos nor sousaphones included. Phew!  ;)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on January 19, 2022, 04:31:02 AM
Quote from: LKB on January 19, 2022, 04:23:40 AM
It could have been worse, but fortunately l saw neither banjos nor sousaphones included. Phew!  ;)

I'm sure they're both correlated with incest and inbreeding.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on January 19, 2022, 11:54:05 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on January 19, 2022, 03:47:08 AM
Greg: your credulousness for this utterly made up  infantile rubbish betrays a complete lack of exposure to the real world and real people. Displaying that ignorance should embarrass you.
Why do you think this was made up?
It's highly unlikely.

She regularly has surveys on her website:
https://knowingless.com/survey/

although since that survey is done, it's not listed any more.

93k twitter followers, onlyfans, and probably whatever social media as well since I'm not really familiar with this person- If she just made this up, I would have probably seen someone say something about it. And getting 19k respondents seems doable with a large enough audience.

Or do you think 19k people all just lied?

Anyways, if you follow "believe all women," then no reason to doubt.  ;)


Quote from: SimonNZ on January 19, 2022, 03:47:08 AM
Wait...choking and asphyxiation isn't a famously politically and economically centrist desire?

Women don't really have a fetish for "creepy crawlies"?
If you are struggling to find an overall meaning in any of this, then don't think that's a problem with the data/topic itself.
Some are more unclear, but you could have picked a few examples where even the most dense of individuals can extract some meaning or insight. Just look at the far left and far right, and the authoritarian areas. Truly just random, and no meaning?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 19, 2022, 05:23:13 PM
You like to talk about your "gut instinct" for evaluating the accuracy or believability of things. Does the information in those graphs tally with all your worldly experience, with what you've seen and heard elsewhere? Or does it seem more like something produced by a teenage virgin boy, troll-voted on by teenage virgin boys and read by teenage virgin boys?


In actual US politics news: Eric Trump pleads the fifth a record-breaking 500 times in a single hearing.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 19, 2022, 05:33:46 PM
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-01-19/supreme-court-rejects-trump-clears-disclosure-of-jan-6-papers

Supreme Court Rejects Trump, Clears Release of Jan. 6 Papers
Trump sought to block disclosure citing executive privilege
Thomas is lone public dissenter in victory for House committee

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/19/supreme-court-rejects-trumps-request-to-block-release-of-white-house-records-from-jan-6-committee.html

(if the first link is paywall)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on January 19, 2022, 05:57:42 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on January 19, 2022, 05:23:13 PM
You like to talk about your "gut instinct" for evaluating the accuracy or believability of things.
Yes. Depends on the situation, and not the only tool, but yes.


Quote from: SimonNZ on January 19, 2022, 05:23:13 PM
Does the information in those graphs tally with all your worldly experience, with what you've seen and heard elsewhere? Or does it seem more like something produced by a teenage Virginia boy, troll-voted on by teenage Virginia boys and read by teenage Virginia boys?
Idk what Virginia has to do with it, but


Quote from: SimonNZ on January 19, 2022, 05:23:13 PM
Or does it seem more like something produced by a teenage Virginia boy
The lady who produced the poll talks about it on the video link, it's on her twitter and her website also. There's no reason to question this if you just checked the links I provided.


Quote from: SimonNZ on January 19, 2022, 05:23:13 PM
troll-voted on by teenage Virginia boys and read by teenage Virginia boys?
If there's some people who "troll-voted," it's unlikely it would have been enough votes to change the results greatly.
It's possible, but coordinating hundreds or thousands of people to troll-vote seems unlikely.
I don't see the point, either. Every area has deviant stuff.


Quote from: SimonNZ on January 19, 2022, 05:23:13 PM
Does the information in those graphs tally with all your worldly experience, with what you've seen and heard elsewhere?
Many of the results are not a surprise, but some are.
If you mean offline experience, there's no way to know because it's not like most people would be willing to talk about it openly.
I only have one example, discussed this with a friend and he mentioned that his gay friend told him he was lib left- which is the gayest quadrant, and not really a surprise to me.
The only way to get this info large-scale would be from anonymous polls.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 19, 2022, 06:25:51 PM
Quote from: greg on January 19, 2022, 05:57:42 PM


Idk what Virginia has to do with it, but



Lol. Autocorrect autocensored the word virgins.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on January 20, 2022, 12:48:50 PM
Literacy rates, U.S.A..
Even if the size of immigrants is considered, the figures look low.

https://www.thinkimpact.com/literacy-statistics/#:~:text=The%20literacy%20rate%20for%20adults%20across%20the%20U.S.%20averages%2088%25.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on January 20, 2022, 07:44:06 PM
Quote from: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on January 20, 2022, 12:48:50 PM
Even if the size of immigrants is considered, the figures look low.

Quote
34% of adults who lack proficiency in literacy were born outside the US.
So instead of 21%, it would be ~14% of the native population can't read?

Seems like I would have known at least one person that can't read besides this one guy I met a long time ago with Down Syndrome. It seems a bit off.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 22, 2022, 12:58:18 PM
Arizona Democratic Party votes to censure Sinema, citing filibuster vote
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on January 22, 2022, 01:14:29 PM
Sorry if this further disgusts people.
Older people may know about this already, but this is a little before my time.


Brezhnev's Kiss

A mural is shown at 13:27
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JM0kapZFg2A


What I found hilarious about this, is if any remembers before the US election, I mentioned it would be hilarious if Biden and Trump just randomly starting kissing each other at the debates.

It seems like this was already a practice among socialist leaders.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: André on January 22, 2022, 04:18:44 PM
Quote from: greg on January 22, 2022, 01:14:29 PM
Sorry if this further disgusts people.
Older people may know about this already, but this is a little before my time.


Brezhnev's Kiss

A mural is shown at 13:27
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JM0kapZFg2A


What I found hilarious about this, is if any remembers before the US election, I mentioned it would be hilarious if Biden and Trump just randomly starting kissing each other at the debates.

It seems like this was already a practice among socialist leaders.

It used to be common for Russians. Back in 1972 the hockey 'series of the century' tournament between the NHL and the USSR team saw soviet players routinely kissing after a goal. Many eyebrows were raised.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 22, 2022, 04:35:59 PM
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 22, 2022, 04:49:17 PM
Not sure I see much difference between that and the way Western  soccer players jump all over each other after every goal now.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on January 22, 2022, 05:10:29 PM
It was pretty famous.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_God,_Help_Me_to_Survive_This_Deadly_Love
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 23, 2022, 03:01:52 PM
D.C. Is a Donut. There Is No Center in Washington Politics (https://www.thedailybeast.com/dc-is-a-donut-there-is-no-center-in-washington-politics?source=twitter&via=desktop)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on January 23, 2022, 07:36:46 PM
Quote from: André on January 22, 2022, 04:18:44 PM
It used to be common for Russians. Back in 1972 the hockey 'series of the century' tournament between the NHL and the USSR team saw soviet players routinely kissing after a goal. Many eyebrows were raised.
Fascinating! I could imagine how odd that must have appeared.  ;D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on January 25, 2022, 08:13:20 AM
Some Trump allies are cooperating with the Jan. 6 committee. Here's what we know.


By Aaron Blake
Senior reporter
Yesterday at 11:24 a.m. EST Updated today at 9:15 a.m. EST

For all the allies of former president Donald Trump who are refusing to testify to the Jan. 6 committee, fighting its subpoenas and invoking the Fifth Amendment, it can be easy to gloss over the evidence the committee has apparently gotten from those around Trump.

In recent days, the committee detailed some key testimony from Keith Kellogg, a Trump loyalist and aide to then-Vice President Mike Pence who was in the room with Trump that day. And on Sunday, Rep. Bennie G. Thompson (D-Miss.), chairman of the Jan. 6 committee, said former attorney general William P. Barr has been cooperating with its inquiry. Shortly after that development, Politico's Betsy Woodruff Swan reported Trump ally Bernard Kerik had shed light on where the idea to have Trump write an executive order seizing voting machines came from.

As The Washington Post's Amy B Wang and Tom Hamburger noted about Barr's participation, it's "a further indication that several former Trump administration officials are cooperating with the panel even as others are fighting efforts to compel their testimony."

Below is a look at who from Trump's orbit has cooperated with or spoken to the committee, along with what we know about it and what else they might have insights into.

William P. Barr

What we know about it: Not much, except that he has worked with the committee, and thus far conversations have reportedly been informal. "We've had conversations with the former attorney general already," Thompson said on CBS News on Sunday morning. Thompson was asked whether the committee would ask Barr about a draft plan to seize voting machines, and he said it would.

What he might know: Barr announced his resignation Dec. 14 and officially exited on Dec. 23, meaning he was absent for many of the key late developments in the Jan. 6 timeline. But before he left, he did publicly rebut Trump's claims of widespread voter fraud and took part in meetings about them with Trump and the White House, including in early December. And there is plenty of evidence that Trump sought to lean on the Justice Department to legitimize his claims. A U.S. attorney who resigned under pressure said Barr told him at one point in early December to make looking into the voter-fraud claims pushed by Rudolph W. Giuliani a "top priority."

Keith Kellogg

What we know about it: Some of Kellogg's testimony was detailed Friday in a letter the committee sent seeking testimony from Ivanka Trump. Kellogg, a retired Army lieutenant general, confirmed that Trump told Pence something to the effect of "you don't have the courage to make a hard decision" — about Pence refusing to help overturn the election in Congress on Jan. 6. Kellogg confirmed reporting that Ivanka Trump had responded to the call by saying, "Mike Pence is a good man." Kellogg's testimony also reinforced that Trump was reluctant to act to quell the violence; he said Ivanka Trump was enlisted in the effort because others like him, chief of staff Mark Meadows and White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany weren't getting through. "She went back in, because Ivanka can be pretty tenacious," Kellogg testified.

What he might know: Unlike some others on this list, Kellogg remains very much enmeshed in Trump world, notably serving at the Trump-allied America First Policy Institute. But he was also in the room with Trump that day, and he apparently testified in detail on some key elements at the heart of the inquiry, including Trump's pressure on Pence and Trump's delayed response. The committee has also said it has evidence that the White House Counsel's Office might have determined that what Trump wanted Pence to do was illegal — which is key to a potential criminal charge — although it's not clear what that's based upon.

Bernard Kerik

What we know about it: Kerik reportedly provided documents to the committee last month, while withholding documents he deemed to be privileged. And Politico has now reported that Kerik told the committee that Phil Waldron, a retired Army colonel, was the one who came up with the idea of an executive order to seize voting machines.

What he might know: Kerik was deeply involved in efforts to overturn the election, having set up shop at the Willard hotel near the White House with others leading the effort. Other leaders of the Willard "war room" have defied a subpoena (Stephen K. Bannon) or invoked Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination (John Eastman).

Jeffrey Rosen

What we know about it: Barr's successor as acting attorney general answered the committee's questions in October. He also previously testified publicly to the Senate last summer about Trump's pressure campaign on the Justice Department.

What he might know: Rosen was in charge of the DOJ for the final weeks of Trump's effort to overturn the election, and Trump spoke with him frequently. Rosen would seemingly have insight on things such as the effort to seize voting machines.

Kayleigh McEnany

What we know about it: Not much, beyond that she appeared virtually before the committee earlier this month. Interestingly, the committee last week shared texts between McEnany and Fox News host Sean Hannity that it had obtained. In those Jan. 7 texts, Hannity shared a plan for Trump moving forward that included "No more stolen election talk." McEnany responded to the five-point plan by saying, "Love that. Thank you. That is the playbook. I will help reinforce." She added later of Hannity's suggestion that "crazy people" should not have access to Trump, "Yes 100%." The committee previously shared texts that Meadows had shared, including with Hannity and others. It's not clear these new texts came from McEnany.

What she might know: McEnany, like Kellogg, would appear to have firsthand insights into the White House's response in real time. In addition, she was part of the effort to push bogus fraud allegations. She was among those Kellogg described as having sought to intervene unsuccessfully before Ivanka Trump was called in.

Mark Meadows

What we know about it: Meadows shared documents while momentarily cooperating with the committee. Those documents showed, among other things, Fox News hosts and even Trump's own son, Donald Trump Jr., pleading for a more proactive response from Trump on Jan. 6.

What Meadows might know: Meadows is fighting further cooperation and has been held in contempt of Congress — facing the prospect of the kind of criminal charges that Bannon now faces. But what he has provided — and could provide if he were compelled to testify — could give the committee unique insight into both what was happening around Trump on Jan. 6 and the preceding efforts to overturn the election. It has been disclosed that Meadows was heavily involved in pleading with the Justice Department to legitimize Trump's claims, passing along a number of debunked conspiracy theories, including one about Italian satellites.

The others

What we know about it: A trio of key figures submitted to questioning on one day in early December, though their degrees of cooperation are largely a mystery. Two of them — Jan. 6 rally organizer Ali Alexander and former top Pentagon aide Kash Patel — seem to have cooperated to some degree. (Alexander reportedly detailed his ties to extreme House Republicans, while Patel said in a statement, "I have always been willing and able to share with the Committee, and the American people, the truth about the events of January 6." Another, Trump lawyer John Eastman, sought Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination.

What they might know: Alexander would seem able to speak to any ties between the White House and the organizing of the Jan. 6 rally, at which Trump spoke — with other organizers suggesting there was concern about pushing people toward the Capitol, as Trump did. Patel is a Trump loyalist who has been a key figure in other Trump controversies. He formerly served as an aide to Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), who resigned from Congress earlier this month.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on January 27, 2022, 09:20:33 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on December 08, 2021, 07:28:10 AM
There's increased discussion in Europe about expanding nuclear power again; Macron for example has big plans.

'Nuclear energy, too, has costs and hazards: radiation risks in the present; the disposal of spent fuel that must be safeguarded for centuries to come.'

No, it tends to be considerably more than that. For example, the Finnish storage facility used for such deposits calculates with 100,000 years of storage of the nuclear waste, as a necessary range.

News from nearby Sweden  - local experts are uncertain, whether a local storage system in Forsmark, like the Finnish one, designed for 100,000 years of storage, will maybe only last for 100 years. They think that sufficient investigations have not been done.
(Source in Swedish: https://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/a/MLJQPB/kritiken-mot-karnkraftsbeslutet-forhastat-och-osakert)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on January 28, 2022, 04:16:55 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on January 27, 2022, 09:20:33 AM
News from nearby Sweden  - local experts are uncertain, whether a local storage system in Forsmark, like the Finnish one, designed for 100,000 years of storage, will maybe only last for 100 years. They think that sufficient investigations have not been done.
(Source in Swedish: https://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/a/MLJQPB/kritiken-mot-karnkraftsbeslutet-forhastat-och-osakert)

A key mitigating factor for nuclear waste is that the sheer volume is very small.  Some reactors designs will burn high-grade waste, reducing the radio activity further.

Here in Ontario, Canada, there is a proposal transport waste over public roads.  Nuclear authorities insist this will be extremely safe, but I'm sure there will be load protests from the NIMBY set.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on January 28, 2022, 09:11:25 AM
Does "nimby" here mean anyone more critical or expressing more concern than, sa, an industry lobbyist?

Likewise "bedwetter" I've seen here a couple of times with this subject.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on January 28, 2022, 03:21:25 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on January 28, 2022, 09:11:25 AM
Does "nimby" here mean anyone more critical or expressing more concern than, sa, an industry lobbyist?

Likewise "bedwetter" I've seen here a couple of times with this subject.

Well, 'NIMBY' simply means "not in my backyard" referring to e.g. to  group homes, waste dumps, whatever.  In my instance nuclear waste caravans moving through city streets.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on February 04, 2022, 02:20:14 PM
So many news/developments today.

-The Republican Party (RNC) censures Cheney and Kinzinger, and calls the January 6 riot 'legitimate political discourse'.

-Beijing Olympic has started today while the US, UK, Japan, Canada, India, Australia, Lithuania, Kosovo, Belgium, Denmark and Estonia have implemented a diplomatic boycott.

-China joins Putin in calling for halt to NATO expansion.

-Michael Avenatti convicted for stealing from Stormy Daniels.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on February 04, 2022, 02:29:45 PM
Also Pence in a speech to the Federalist Society says No, I did not have the power to overturn the election.

Ron DeSantis is revealed to have been in regular contact with Clarence Thomas.

North Carolina's state Supreme Court throws out the restricting maps produced by the state legislature as too gerrymandered.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on February 05, 2022, 12:13:59 AM
Quote from: JBS on February 04, 2022, 02:29:45 PM
Also Pence in a speech to the Federalist Society says No, I did not have the power to overturn the election.

Instead of whining about Pence, the Republicans should be relieved Kamala Harris doesn't have the power to overturn the next election.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 21, 2022, 09:31:39 AM
Opinion: Trump's legal problems are about to get a whole lot worse

By Jennifer Rubin
Columnist
Today at 7:45 a.m. EST

A federal judge ruled last week that a trio of civil claims against defeated former president Donald Trump for his actions on and before the Jan. 6 insurrection can proceed. The cases, brought by 11 members of Congress and two Capitol Police officers, are a reminder that civil liability could deal a substantial blow to the instigator in chief.

In a 112-page opinion, District Court Judge Amit P. Mehta dismissed certain claims against Donald Trump Jr., former Trump attorney Rudolph W. Giuliani and Rep. Mo Brooks (R-Ala.), all of whom joined Trump in his rally preceding the violence. But the language of the ruling was devastating for Trump. "The first ever presidential transfer of power marred by violence was over," the court explained. "These cases concern who, if anyone, should be held civilly liable for the events of January 6th."

The lawsuits make use of the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871, which was originally aimed at White vigilantes who "conspire to prevent, by force, intimidation, or threat, any person from accepting or holding any office, trust, or place of confidence under the United States, or from discharging any duties thereof."

Mehta wrote that this allows people to sue who are harmed by violent conspiracies that "prevent federal officers from discharging their duties or accepting or holding office their duties or accepting or holding office." Trump sought to dismiss the suits, but Mehta refused, making several critical findings.

First, like the Supreme Court with Trump's attempt to conceal his tax returns, Mehta flat-out rejected Trump's absurd claim that he was acting in his executive capacity in trying to throw out the results of the 2020 election. Trump was able to contest the election through litigation, but the insurrection was Trump's last resort after his campaign lost more than 60 court battles challenging the results. Furthermore, Mehta wrote, Trump does not gain immunity simply because his actions touched on "matters of public concern." The court also rejected the notion that because Trump was acquitted in his impeachment trial he gets absolution from civil cases.

Second, Mehta held that congressional plaintiffs have standing to sue since they are indisputably "officers" within the meaning of the statute. Trump tried to prevent members of Congress from carrying out their duties regarding the tabulation of electoral college votes; therefore, they can sue. Mehta also found that the plaintiffs properly set forth a claim of conspiracy to prevent Congress from performing its duties by "force, intimidation, or threat."

Mehta wrote:

[Trump] repeatedly tweeted false claims of election fraud and corruption, contacted state and local officials to overturn election results, and urged the Vice President to send Electoral ballots back for recertification. The President communicated directly with his supporters, inviting them to Washington, D.C., to a rally on January 6, the day of the Certification, telling them it would be "wild." He directly participated in the rally's planning, and his campaign funded the rally with millions of dollars. At the rally itself, the President gave a rousing speech in which he repeated the false narrative of a stolen election. The crowd responded by chanting and screaming, "Storm the Capitol," "Invade the Capitol," "Take the Capitol right now," and "Fight for Trump." Still, the President ended his speech by telling the crowd that "we fight like hell and if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore." Almost immediately after these words, he called on rally-goers to march to the Capitol to give "pride and boldness" to reluctant lawmakers "to take back our country." Importantly, it was the President and his campaign's idea to send thousands to the Capitol while the Certification was underway. It was not a planned part of the rally. In fact, the permit expressly stated that it did "not authorize a march from the Ellipse." From these alleged facts, it is at least plausible to infer that, when he called on rally-goers to march to the Capitol, the President did so with the goal of disrupting lawmakers' efforts to certify the Electoral College votes.

Focusing on the number of times Trump used "we" in his address to the mob, Mehta held that this "implies that the President and rally-goers were acting together towards a common goal." That, he wrote, "is the essence of a civil conspiracy."

Finally, Mehta held that Trump's words may not be protected by the First Amendment. Courts have long held that speakers are exempt from liability unless they were explicitly or implicitly "inciting imminent lawless action," which may apply to Trump's words. Mehta found:

Having considered the President's January 6 Rally Speech in its entirety and in context, the court concludes that the President's statements that, "[W]e fight. We fight like hell and if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore," and "[W]e're going to try to and give [weak Republicans] the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country," immediately before exhorting rally-goers to "walk down Pennsylvania Avenue," are plausibly words of incitement not protected by the First Amendment. ... It is reasonable to infer that the President would have known that some supporters viewed his invitation as a call to action ...

So, when the President said to the crowd at the end of his remarks, "We fight. We fight like hell and if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore," moments before instructing them to march to the Capitol, the President's speech plausibly crossed the line into unprotected territory.

The opinion is not a decision on the merits, but in allowing the cases to go forward, it sets the stage for what could be a nightmarish trial for Trump. Trump may refuse to testify, but unlike a criminal proceeding, taking the Fifth could be used against him in a civil hearing. (Plus, in his flurry of post-presidential speeches remarking on the insurrection, he may have waived his Fifth Amendment rights or, at the very least, given plaintiffs even more statements showing he was seeking to overthrow the election.)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on February 23, 2022, 03:12:08 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 21, 2022, 09:31:39 AM
Opinion: Trump's legal problems are about to get a whole lot worse

By Jennifer Rubin
Columnist
Today at 7:45 a.m. EST

A federal judge ruled last week that a trio of civil claims against defeated former president Donald Trump for his actions on and before the Jan. 6 insurrection can proceed. The cases, brought by 11 members of Congress and two Capitol Police officers, are a reminder that civil liability could deal a substantial blow to the instigator in chief.

In a 112-page opinion, District Court Judge Amit P. Mehta dismissed certain claims against Donald Trump Jr., former Trump attorney Rudolph W. Giuliani and Rep. Mo Brooks (R-Ala.), all of whom joined Trump in his rally preceding the violence. But the language of the ruling was devastating for Trump. "The first ever presidential transfer of power marred by violence was over," the court explained. "These cases concern who, if anyone, should be held civilly liable for the events of January 6th."

The lawsuits make use of the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871, which was originally aimed at White vigilantes who "conspire to prevent, by force, intimidation, or threat, any person from accepting or holding any office, trust, or place of confidence under the United States, or from discharging any duties thereof."

Mehta wrote that this allows people to sue who are harmed by violent conspiracies that "prevent federal officers from discharging their duties or accepting or holding office their duties or accepting or holding office." Trump sought to dismiss the suits, but Mehta refused, making several critical findings.

First, like the Supreme Court with Trump's attempt to conceal his tax returns, Mehta flat-out rejected Trump's absurd claim that he was acting in his executive capacity in trying to throw out the results of the 2020 election. Trump was able to contest the election through litigation, but the insurrection was Trump's last resort after his campaign lost more than 60 court battles challenging the results. Furthermore, Mehta wrote, Trump does not gain immunity simply because his actions touched on "matters of public concern." The court also rejected the notion that because Trump was acquitted in his impeachment trial he gets absolution from civil cases.

Second, Mehta held that congressional plaintiffs have standing to sue since they are indisputably "officers" within the meaning of the statute. Trump tried to prevent members of Congress from carrying out their duties regarding the tabulation of electoral college votes; therefore, they can sue. Mehta also found that the plaintiffs properly set forth a claim of conspiracy to prevent Congress from performing its duties by "force, intimidation, or threat."

Mehta wrote:

[Trump] repeatedly tweeted false claims of election fraud and corruption, contacted state and local officials to overturn election results, and urged the Vice President to send Electoral ballots back for recertification. The President communicated directly with his supporters, inviting them to Washington, D.C., to a rally on January 6, the day of the Certification, telling them it would be "wild." He directly participated in the rally's planning, and his campaign funded the rally with millions of dollars. At the rally itself, the President gave a rousing speech in which he repeated the false narrative of a stolen election. The crowd responded by chanting and screaming, "Storm the Capitol," "Invade the Capitol," "Take the Capitol right now," and "Fight for Trump." Still, the President ended his speech by telling the crowd that "we fight like hell and if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore." Almost immediately after these words, he called on rally-goers to march to the Capitol to give "pride and boldness" to reluctant lawmakers "to take back our country." Importantly, it was the President and his campaign's idea to send thousands to the Capitol while the Certification was underway. It was not a planned part of the rally. In fact, the permit expressly stated that it did "not authorize a march from the Ellipse." From these alleged facts, it is at least plausible to infer that, when he called on rally-goers to march to the Capitol, the President did so with the goal of disrupting lawmakers' efforts to certify the Electoral College votes.

Focusing on the number of times Trump used "we" in his address to the mob, Mehta held that this "implies that the President and rally-goers were acting together towards a common goal." That, he wrote, "is the essence of a civil conspiracy."

Finally, Mehta held that Trump's words may not be protected by the First Amendment. Courts have long held that speakers are exempt from liability unless they were explicitly or implicitly "inciting imminent lawless action," which may apply to Trump's words. Mehta found:

Having considered the President's January 6 Rally Speech in its entirety and in context, the court concludes that the President's statements that, "[W]e fight. We fight like hell and if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore," and "[W]e're going to try to and give [weak Republicans] the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country," immediately before exhorting rally-goers to "walk down Pennsylvania Avenue," are plausibly words of incitement not protected by the First Amendment. ... It is reasonable to infer that the President would have known that some supporters viewed his invitation as a call to action ...

So, when the President said to the crowd at the end of his remarks, "We fight. We fight like hell and if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore," moments before instructing them to march to the Capitol, the President's speech plausibly crossed the line into unprotected territory.

The opinion is not a decision on the merits, but in allowing the cases to go forward, it sets the stage for what could be a nightmarish trial for Trump. Trump may refuse to testify, but unlike a criminal proceeding, taking the Fifth could be used against him in a civil hearing. (Plus, in his flurry of post-presidential speeches remarking on the insurrection, he may have waived his Fifth Amendment rights or, at the very least, given plaintiffs even more statements showing he was seeking to overthrow the election.)
Will there finally be a limit to his madness and what can be inflicted on American society and politics? I agree with free speech broadly. His backers will scream free speech. I do not agree with giving social media platforms so much power over what can be said and who can be cancelled, etc. I do hope these cases are successful though. I'm going to sound schizophrenic here because I do think Trump-derangement syndrome exists. Sometimes, it seems, the country lost its mind and dems focused on the wrong things. But not this. There has to be some criminality here. There has to be a limit in how much damage one maniacal and unhinged character can do to American democracy. Trump and his people will stop at nothing and will justify anything. There has to be some firm whip to finally provide limits. Too much tolerance and society and the political order cannot stand.     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on February 23, 2022, 04:54:49 AM
Quote from: milk on February 23, 2022, 03:12:08 AM
Will there finally be a limit to his madness and what can be inflicted on American society and politics? I agree with free speech broadly. His backers will scream free speech. I do not agree with giving social media platforms so much power over what can be said and who can be cancelled, etc. I do hope these cases are successful though. I'm going to sound schizophrenic here because I do think Trump-derangement syndrome exists. Sometimes, it seems, the country lost its mind and dems focused on the wrong things. But not this. There has to be some criminality here. There has to be a limit in how much damage one maniacal and unhinged character can do to American democracy. Trump and his people will stop at nothing and will justify anything. There has to be some firm whip to finally provide limits. Too much tolerance and society and the political order cannot stand.   

The politics change when radio became wide-spread, more so when TV arrived, and yet again with the advent of the Internet and social media.  The last has permitted the ignorant and irrational to communicate with, and thereby reinforce, each other as never before.  When the 30-40% of the populations so afflicted unite the USA and other democracies are in dire jeopardy -- bear in mind that there are always those who aren't so ignorant or irrational who are willing to exploit those who are for personal advantage.

Can threat be addressed?  How?  When dealing with the "bottom" 30-40% of the population education, the normally advocated solution, simply won't work.  These folks tend strongly not to listen to science or factual or rational explanations;  they crave simple solutions to complex problems, and listen instead to those who offer conspiracy theories and misinformation.

Countries such as China, Russia, and other control all media including social media, thus even (or most especially) the stupidest are swayed to the official line.  However this control is out of the question for democracies.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on February 23, 2022, 05:31:56 AM
I do not know what the answer is.

It puzzles me how the IQ's of intelligent people drop by 50% when discussing politics.

One thing that drives me crazy is when someone accuses me of believing something that I do not believe in.

A great example of this occurred on Bill Maher's show a few years ago.  A right-wing pundit proclaimed that all Democrats claimed the Trump stole the election in 2016.  The rest of the panal responded that they knew Trump won the election.  We have over 300 million people in the US, so I am sure there are a few million misinformed people who may think that Trump stole the election from Hillary.  Whether we like it or not, Trump won the election.  Most of us know that.  Yet this right-wing genius on the show did not believe the rest of the panal and kept arguing with them about it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on February 23, 2022, 06:38:17 AM
Quote from: arpeggio on February 23, 2022, 05:31:56 AM
A great example of this occurred on Bill Maher's show a few years ago.  A right-wing pundit proclaimed that all Democrats claimed the Trump stole the election in 2016.  The rest of the panal responded that they knew Trump won the election.  We have over 300 million people in the US, so I am sure there are a few million misinformed people who may think that Trump stole the election from Hillary.  Whether we like it or not, Trump won the election.  Most of us know that.  Yet this right-wing genius on the show did not believe the rest of the panal and kept arguing with them about it.

Stole the 2016 election? Not in any normal sense. Trump did, however, solicit and accept massive illegal campaign contributions in the form of labor and intelligence (disinformation) services from a hostile foreign power, as well as actively colluding through intermediaries with that power and its intelligence services. The effect of these activities might well have swung the election in Trump's favor, although it would be impossible to definitively establish this. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on February 23, 2022, 06:51:58 AM
Remember we had George H. W. Bush, then George W. Bush, and people were fearing a Bush dynasty? Bushes like Jeb were supposedly waiting in the wings to continue the inexorable march of the Bushes. I suspect people had the same fear of the Kennedys.

The Kennedys degenerated to a point where sustaining life was an issue. Remember Michael, who killed himself skiing into a tree, and John John, who thought he could fly an airplane in dense fog without adequate training just because, well, he was a Kennedy. All that is left of them is a half-wit RFK Jr. who is telling us that the nurse giving you a free vaccine at CVS is basically a Nazi S.S. and Fauci is the moral equivalent of Dr Mengele. The Bushes have shriveled. Fred Trump was a shrewd guy who made millions (billions in today's currency) exploiting Federal subsidies to build affordable housing, Donald is imbecile, his offspring, Donald Jr. and Ivanka are morons. They will be gone. We have to be worried about who will come next.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on February 23, 2022, 07:01:26 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on February 23, 2022, 06:38:17 AM
Stole the 2016 election? Not in any normal sense. Trump did, however, solicit and accept massive illegal campaign contributions in the form of labor and intelligence (disinformation) services from a hostile foreign power, as well as actively colluding through intermediaries with that power and its intelligence services. The effect of these activities might well have swung the election in Trump's favor, although it would be impossible to definitively establish this.
This is the part I find to be...I don't want to say "derangement," just unfounded. There was disinformation. I believe the coverage of it was overblown and that Clinton was just a terrible candidate who narrowly lost the popular vote. Democrats are good at blaming others for their myriad problems. Unfortunately, those problems have worsened and at the worst of times.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on February 23, 2022, 07:16:02 AM
Quote from: milk on February 23, 2022, 07:01:26 AM

This is the part I find to be...I don't want to say "derangement," just unfounded. There was disinformation. I believe the coverage of it was overblown and that Clinton was just a terrible candidate who narrowly lost the popular vote. Democrats are good at blaming others for their myriad problems. Unfortunately, those problems have worsened and at the worst of times.

She won the popular vote by a healthy margin, she lost the electoral college vote after very narrow losses in several swing states.

The wasn't a great candidate but I don't think she was a 'terrible' candidate, but carried huge amounts of baggage due to her degenerate husband and other issues like "her emails." She could very well have won if she hadn't been torpedoes by Comey's totally inappropriate news conference, then the idiotic reopening of the case when Anthony Weiner's laptop was discovered. Your neglect of the Russian influence is not justified. The Russian intelligence service broke into the DNC's servers and coordinated with Roger Stone to dump embarrassing emails when they could do the most damage.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on February 23, 2022, 07:19:53 AM
Many of the shenanigans may have (And please not I said MAY have) effected how people voted.

The bottom line is still, Trump won.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 23, 2022, 08:21:13 AM
Quote from: arpeggio on February 23, 2022, 07:19:53 AM
Many of the shenanigans may have (And please not I said MAY have) effected how people voted.

The bottom line is still, Trump won.

And, be it said, legitimately. It's a disgrace, but it's the truth.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on February 23, 2022, 09:29:14 AM
"Trump Derangement Syndrome" describes the loyalists dressed head to toe in his merch, who send death threats and physically threaten anyone who has disagreed with him, who look forward to a civil war, and who will reach for their wallets with every fearmongering solicitation while talking about their "economic anxiety" and who wish to see him as president for life, excusing his every fault with whatever the days spin says.

The critics who see his every action as self serving and self dealing with no regard for others, the country, for laws or for democracy? They are spot on. No derangement. No syndrome.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on February 23, 2022, 09:42:40 AM
Quote from: milk on February 23, 2022, 07:01:26 AM

This is the part I find to be...I don't want to say "derangement," just unfounded. There was disinformation. I believe the coverage of it was overblown and that Clinton was just a terrible candidate who narrowly lost the popular vote. Democrats are good at blaming others for their myriad problems. Unfortunately, those problems have worsened and at the worst of times.

Speaking of "terrible" candidates, will Biden run in '24?  (Trump certainly well if his health doesn't collapse before then, (dare we hope).)  If not Biden in '24, who might it be?  Kamala Harris?  My perspective is a bit distant, but judging by the few public appearances I've seen, she has all the charisma of a sweaty sock.  If the Democrat candidate, I don't see how see could win against Trump or, say, Ted Cruz.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on February 23, 2022, 09:54:06 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on February 23, 2022, 09:42:40 AM
Speaking of "terrible" candidates, will Biden run in '24?  (Trump certainly well if his health doesn't collapse before then, (dare we hope).)  If not Biden in '24, who might it be?  Kamala Harris?  My perspective is a bit distant, but judging by the few public appearances I've seen, she has all the charisma of a sweaty sock.  If the Democrat candidate, I don't see how see could win against Trump or, say, Ted Cruz.

Kamala Harris, when a Senator, did a good job cross examining various Trump appointees as part of Senate hearings. As a presidential candidate she did not articulate a vision for the country that was clear or convincing to me.

Among the previous set of Democratic candidates seeking the nomination, I liked Corey Booker. By the time my state's primary came around he had dropped out and I ended up voting for Elizabeth Warren. I don't think she'd be a great candidate, too much of a technocrat.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 23, 2022, 11:44:54 AM
Opinion: GOP hysterics about 'wokeness' aren't attracting voters

By Jennifer Rubin
Columnist

Today at 12:26 p.m. EST

A fleet of pundits will tell you the real problem for Democrats is that they talk too much about race and want to impose their "wokeness" on others. This supposedly provides the justification for book banning and prohibiting "critical race theory" in schools (even though it isn't taught to kids).

As it turns out, the public is much more progressive on matters of race than Republicans and those pundits believe. Two polls suggest the public doesn't like what Republicans are peddling.

A poll from Christopher Newport University's Wason Center for Civic Leadership in Virginia reports, "Voters support teaching how racism continues to impact American society (63% to 33%) and oppose a ban on the teaching of Critical Race Theory in public schools (57% to 35%)." That might explain in part why Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R), who moved to ban such education, is so unpopular.

That poll does not seem to be an outlier. CBS News reports on a poll it conducted with YouGov: "Large majorities — more than eight in 10 — don't think books should be banned from schools for discussing race and criticizing U.S. history, for depicting slavery in the past or more broadly for political ideas they disagree with." Whites, Blacks and parents all agree. So do more than 80 percent of Republicans. Moreover, CBS reports, "Four in 10 believe teaching about race in America makes people more racially tolerant today, too, well outpacing the few who think it does the opposite."

Despite trying to gin up public outrage on critical race theory, Republicans haven't succeeded in raising awareness on it. Most voters have heard little or nothing about it, CBS reports; those who are more familiar with it are more likely to be conservatives. A plurality thinks schools teach too little about Black American history.

The CBS-YouGov poll also found that three-quarters of its respondents said that "public schools should be allowed to teach about ideas and historical events that might make some students uncomfortable." More than 60 percent of Republicans say the same. And unlike the racial amnesiacs in the GOP, more than 70 percent of Americans think racism historically has been a major problem in the United States. Fifty-eight percent think it still is.

So have Republicans been barking up the wrong tree? Are Democrats tearing their hair out about their party being too "woke" freaking out over nothing? The data certainly contradicts the conventional wisdom. It also casts recent events into new light, such as the recall of San Francisco school board members who were criticized for being too focused on racial justice.

As a preliminary matter, don't confuse the genuine frustration among parents over school closures during the pandemic with the cultural wedge issues that right-wing media and MAGA politicians cook up. Democrats may have been tone-deaf as to the former, but it does not mean voters have bought into Republicans' extreme ideas on schooling. Democrats in San Francisco infuriated parents by attempting to rename schools when they should have been figuring out how to reopen them. These are not parents seeking to ban books or bastardize history.

Rather than run away from these issues, Democrats need to go on the offense. That means talking about the concerns of real voters — crime, missed schooling, inflation — and explaining that Republicans are embracing a radical, bizarre agenda that offers no practical solutions on these issues. Just look at the 11-point plan drawn up by Sen. Rick Scott (Fla.), head of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, that devotes pages to made-up racial issues. Scott emphasized that the plan was his alone, not the committee's. Still, tell me again which party is obsessed with race?

Democrats also need to embrace values that Americans hold dear — democracy, fairness, opportunity and empathy. Democrats have been the pro-family party, trying to help working parents and make child-rearing less expensive. They need to be unabashed patriots (unlike Republicans defending armed insurrectionists and rooting for the Russian dictator) and defenders of American values.

Finally, Democrats should move to recapture the education issue. They supported funding to reopen schools in the American Rescue Plan; Republicans uniformly opposed it. Democrats want to pay teachers more, extend education to pre-K and teach accurate U.S. history. Republicans oppose all these. Instead, Republicans have sought to ban a book about the Holocaust, make life miserable for LGBTQ kids and create a litigation industry for parents to sue schools. Democrats should skewer Republicans on their politicization of education.

Democrats have been thrown on the defense by a party of trolls who seek to scare and infuriate the GOP base. Democrats need to respond by expressing solidarity with Americans' values and devise real solutions to their concerns.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on February 23, 2022, 02:10:47 PM
Quote from: milk on February 23, 2022, 07:01:26 AM

This is the part I find to be...I don't want to say "derangement," just unfounded. There was disinformation. I believe the coverage of it was overblown and that Clinton was just a terrible candidate who narrowly lost the popular vote. Democrats are good at blaming others for their myriad problems. Unfortunately, those problems have worsened and at the worst of times.

No, the coverage of the issue was not overblown. In fact, some of the critical data was buried and not revealed until redactions in the Mueller report were lifted. And of course Hillary was a bad candidate. It's not an either or situation. My point is that no one knows the extent to which Trump's illegal campaign activities and the collusion of his campaign with foreign actors affected the outcome of the election. To glibly assume it did not turn the election in Trump's favor is unwarranted. To glibly assume it did is equally unwarranted. It makes some people feel better to believe the former because the vulnerability of the system is scary.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 23, 2022, 03:43:08 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on February 23, 2022, 02:10:47 PM
No, the coverage of the issue was not overblown. In fact, some of the critical data was buried and not revealed until redactions in the Mueller report were lifted. And of course Hillary was a bad candidate. It's not an either or situation. My point is that no one knows the extent to which Trump's illegal campaign activities and the collusion of his campaign with foreign actors affected the outcome of the election. To glibly assume it did not turn the election in Trump's favor is unwarranted. To glibly assume it did is equally unwarranted. It makes some people feel better to believe the former because the vulnerability of the system is scary.

All true.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on February 23, 2022, 04:39:29 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on February 23, 2022, 02:10:47 PM
No, the coverage of the issue was not overblown. In fact, some of the critical data was buried and not revealed until redactions in the Mueller report were lifted. And of course Hillary was a bad candidate. It's not an either or situation. My point is that no one knows the extent to which Trump's illegal campaign activities and the collusion of his campaign with foreign actors affected the outcome of the election. To glibly assume it did not turn the election in Trump's favor is unwarranted. To glibly assume it did is equally unwarranted. It makes some people feel better to believe the former because the vulnerability of the system is scary.
I take issue with your adverb "glibly." I sincerely do not think there's much evidence of "collusion" or that bots had that much effect on the election. These are narratives repeated many times over that are justified by weak inferences only. I think the Comey thing is much more on the mark.
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 23, 2022, 11:44:54 AM
Opinion: GOP hysterics about 'wokeness' aren't attracting voters

By Jennifer Rubin
Columnist

Today at 12:26 p.m. EST

A fleet of pundits will tell you the real problem for Democrats is that they talk too much about race and want to impose their "wokeness" on others. This supposedly provides the justification for book banning and prohibiting "critical race theory" in schools (even though it isn't taught to kids).

As it turns out, the public is much more progressive on matters of race than Republicans and those pundits believe. Two polls suggest the public doesn't like what Republicans are peddling.

A poll from Christopher Newport University's Wason Center for Civic Leadership in Virginia reports, "Voters support teaching how racism continues to impact American society (63% to 33%) and oppose a ban on the teaching of Critical Race Theory in public schools (57% to 35%)." That might explain in part why Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R), who moved to ban such education, is so unpopular.

That poll does not seem to be an outlier. CBS News reports on a poll it conducted with YouGov: "Large majorities — more than eight in 10 — don't think books should be banned from schools for discussing race and criticizing U.S. history, for depicting slavery in the past or more broadly for political ideas they disagree with." Whites, Blacks and parents all agree. So do more than 80 percent of Republicans. Moreover, CBS reports, "Four in 10 believe teaching about race in America makes people more racially tolerant today, too, well outpacing the few who think it does the opposite."

Despite trying to gin up public outrage on critical race theory, Republicans haven't succeeded in raising awareness on it. Most voters have heard little or nothing about it, CBS reports; those who are more familiar with it are more likely to be conservatives. A plurality thinks schools teach too little about Black American history.

The CBS-YouGov poll also found that three-quarters of its respondents said that "public schools should be allowed to teach about ideas and historical events that might make some students uncomfortable." More than 60 percent of Republicans say the same. And unlike the racial amnesiacs in the GOP, more than 70 percent of Americans think racism historically has been a major problem in the United States. Fifty-eight percent think it still is.

So have Republicans been barking up the wrong tree? Are Democrats tearing their hair out about their party being too "woke" freaking out over nothing? The data certainly contradicts the conventional wisdom. It also casts recent events into new light, such as the recall of San Francisco school board members who were criticized for being too focused on racial justice.

As a preliminary matter, don't confuse the genuine frustration among parents over school closures during the pandemic with the cultural wedge issues that right-wing media and MAGA politicians cook up. Democrats may have been tone-deaf as to the former, but it does not mean voters have bought into Republicans' extreme ideas on schooling. Democrats in San Francisco infuriated parents by attempting to rename schools when they should have been figuring out how to reopen them. These are not parents seeking to ban books or bastardize history.

Rather than run away from these issues, Democrats need to go on the offense. That means talking about the concerns of real voters — crime, missed schooling, inflation — and explaining that Republicans are embracing a radical, bizarre agenda that offers no practical solutions on these issues. Just look at the 11-point plan drawn up by Sen. Rick Scott (Fla.), head of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, that devotes pages to made-up racial issues. Scott emphasized that the plan was his alone, not the committee's. Still, tell me again which party is obsessed with race?

Democrats also need to embrace values that Americans hold dear — democracy, fairness, opportunity and empathy. Democrats have been the pro-family party, trying to help working parents and make child-rearing less expensive. They need to be unabashed patriots (unlike Republicans defending armed insurrectionists and rooting for the Russian dictator) and defenders of American values.

Finally, Democrats should move to recapture the education issue. They supported funding to reopen schools in the American Rescue Plan; Republicans uniformly opposed it. Democrats want to pay teachers more, extend education to pre-K and teach accurate U.S. history. Republicans oppose all these. Instead, Republicans have sought to ban a book about the Holocaust, make life miserable for LGBTQ kids and create a litigation industry for parents to sue schools. Democrats should skewer Republicans on their politicization of education.

Democrats have been thrown on the defense by a party of trolls who seek to scare and infuriate the GOP base. Democrats need to respond by expressing solidarity with Americans' values and devise real solutions to their concerns.
I, for one, think kids should be made uncomfortable, more history should be taught on everything, including racism and the history of the African-American experience, books shouldn't be banned AND CRT/Wokeness/EDI/critical Frankfurt nonsense are noxious ideologies and ARE a detriment to society, progress and the chances of Democrats. I think this article is delusional. "The data certainly contradicts the conventional wisdom." um - there's your "tell" right there. Virginia is a wash. San Francisco was a wash. I mean, yeah, who are you gonna believe? Your lying eyes?
Quote from: Spotted Horses on February 23, 2022, 09:54:06 AM
Kamala Harris, when a Senator, did a good job cross examining various Trump appointees as part of Senate hearings. As a presidential candidate she did not articulate a vision for the country that was clear or convincing to me.

Among the previous set of Democratic candidates seeking the nomination, I liked Corey Booker. By the time my state's primary came around he had dropped out and I ended up voting for Elizabeth Warren. I don't think she'd be a great candidate, too much of a technocrat.
Kamala Harris is inept. She will never be president. I doubt she could score the nomination but with today's Democrats, you never know.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on February 23, 2022, 07:32:17 PM
Quote from: milk on February 23, 2022, 04:39:29 PM
I take issue with your adverb "glibly." I sincerely do not think there's much evidence of "collusion" or that bots had that much effect on the election. These are narratives repeated many times over that are justified by weak inferences only. I think the Comey thing is much more on the mark. 
I, for one, think kids should be made uncomfortable, more history should be taught on everything, including racism and the history of the African-American experience, books shouldn't be banned AND CRT/Wokeness/EDI/critical Frankfurt nonsense are noxious ideologies and ARE a detriment to society, progress and the chances of Democrats.

Critical Race theory is not a "noxious ideology." Critical race theory is something taught in law schools and some other graduate programs that addresses the practical question of how racial discrimination can be addressed in the courts when it is not a conscious decision made by an individual with racist intent, but people within an organization following procedures and practices that have racism built in, perhaps without being aware of it themselves. What Republicans are calling critical race theory is simply teaching the true history of the Unites States, including the ugly bits.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on February 23, 2022, 08:45:55 PM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on February 23, 2022, 07:32:17 PM
Critical Race theory is not a "noxious ideology." Critical race theory is something taught in law schools and some other graduate programs that addresses the practical question of how racial discrimination can be addressed in the courts when it is not a conscious decision made by an individual with racist intent, but people within an organization following procedures and practices that have racism built in, perhaps without being aware of it themselves. What Republicans are calling critical race theory is simply teaching the true history of the Unites States, including the ugly bits.
that's not even close to their definition. Critical theories are critical praxis. Not history. Yes, it began as a legal theory. It explicitly includes intersectionality, equity, narrative oppression over "reasonability," etc. you're not taking issues with me, you're taking issue with those who've spelled it out. It's fine to assert that it's good for society. Go right ahead. But you cannot play motte and bailey with it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on February 24, 2022, 01:23:39 PM
Quote from: milk on February 23, 2022, 04:39:29 PM
I take issue with your adverb "glibly." I sincerely do not think there's much evidence of "collusion" or that bots had that much effect on the election. These are narratives repeated many times over that are justified by weak inferences only. I think the Comey thing is much more on the mark. 

There is direct evidence of collusion, including granular RNC polling data for key districts being passed through Russian operatives to disinformation farms where actual human actors, some of whom had "embedded" themselves on popular fora for months or years to build credibility, attempted to influence other users. How effective were these efforts? Who knows. You are aware that Trump's campaign manager (Manefort) was on the hook for eleven million dollars to Oleg Derapaska and that this was used to leverage the acquisition of said data, as well as changes in the Republican party platform, right? Obviously Comey's douchebaggery was significant. Are you assuming he was unaffected by disinformation? Why? 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on February 24, 2022, 04:59:56 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on February 24, 2022, 01:23:39 PM
There is direct evidence of collusion, including granular RNC polling data for key districts being passed through Russian operatives to disinformation farms where actual human actors, some of whom had "embedded" themselves on popular fora for months or years to build credibility, attempted to influence other users. How effective were these efforts? Who knows. You are aware that Trump's campaign manager (Manefort) was on the hook for eleven million dollars to Oleg Derapaska and that this was used to leverage the acquisition of said data, as well as changes in the Republican party platform, right? Obviously Comey's douchebaggery was significant. Are you assuming he was unaffected by disinformation? Why?
I agree they were sketchy people. I agree there are bots. Russian bots and Chinese bots all over the internet up to no good. I just think there's too much obsession by democrats over this. The Steele file, for example, is worthless. Don't you think what Comey came up with on the bots was kind of lame? I think this was a bit of a sideshow and not the reason why Trump was so dangerous or why he won. I could be wrong though. Who really knows? There are a lot of conspiracy theories and, to me, there's enough concrete stuff to pay attention, maybe as a practical matter too.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: arpeggio on February 24, 2022, 06:12:58 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on February 23, 2022, 02:10:47 PM
No, the coverage of the issue was not overblown. In fact, some of the critical data was buried and not revealed until redactions in the Mueller report were lifted. And of course Hillary was a bad candidate. It's not an either or situation. My point is that no one knows the extent to which Trump's illegal campaign activities and the collusion of his campaign with foreign actors affected the outcome of the election. To glibly assume it did not turn the election in Trump's favor is unwarranted. To glibly assume it did is equally unwarranted. It makes some people feel better to believe the former because the vulnerability of the system is scary.

Of course, there were actions that may have affected how people voted.

But once they got into the ballot box......
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on February 24, 2022, 06:30:15 PM
The problem is that bots and fake news don't need to fool a large number of people. For instance, Trump won Wisconsin in 2016 by about 23,000 votes out of 2.8 million cast.He lost the same state in 2020 by about 20,000 out of 3.2 million cast--less than 1%.  Had 11,000 voters voted the other way, or decided not to vote, the result might well have been different.
Had some of those 400,000 people who voted in 2020 also voted in 2016, or not voted in 2020, the result might have been different.  It's all speculative, of course, but add in all the other states with close totals.
If you only need to fool 1% or 2% of the voters, a disinformation campaign can come in handy.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 24, 2022, 06:31:14 PM
Quote from: JBS on February 24, 2022, 06:30:15 PM
The problem is that bots and fake news don't need to fool a large number of people. For instance, Trump won Wisconsin in 2016 by about 23,000 votes out of 2.8 million cast.He lost the same state in 2020 by about 20,000 out of 3.2 million cast--less than 1%.  Had 11,000 voters voted the other way, or decided not to vote, the result might well have been different.
Had some of those 400,000 people who voted in 2020 also voted in 2016, or not voted in 2020, the result might have been different.  It's all speculative, of course, but add in all the other states with close totals.
If you only need to fool 1% or 2% of the voters, a disinformation campaign can come in handy.

Aye.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on February 24, 2022, 07:42:23 PM
Quote from: milk on February 24, 2022, 04:59:56 PM
I agree they were sketchy people. I agree there are bots. Russian bots and Chinese bots all over the internet up to no good. I just think there's too much obsession by democrats over this. The Steele file, for example, is worthless. Don't you think what Comey came up with on the bots was kind of lame? I think this was a bit of a sideshow and not the reason why Trump was so dangerous or why he won. I could be wrong though. Who really knows? There are a lot of conspiracy theories and, to me, there's enough concrete stuff to pay attention, maybe as a practical matter too.

I don't give a fig about Comey. Facebook deleted tens of thousands of accounts that they determined were fake and originated in Russia. I remember seeing on the national news a parade float, I think somewhere in Florida, which featured someone in a Hillary Clinton costume being rolled down the street in a cage, "lock her up.". It was shown that the demonstration was arranged and paid for by Russian agents using a fake Facebook account. They recruited people to build the float, participate in the parade, and Russian agents paid for fabrication of the float.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on February 24, 2022, 10:34:54 PM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on February 24, 2022, 07:42:23 PM
I don't give a fig about Comey. Facebook deleted tens of thousands of accounts that they determined were fake and originated in Russia. I remember seeing on the national news a parade float, I think somewhere in Florida, which featured someone in a Hillary Clinton costume being rolled down the street in a cage, "lock her up.". It was shown that the demonstration was arranged and paid for by Russian agents using a fake Facebook account. They recruited people to build the float, participate in the parade, and Russian agents paid for fabrication of the float.
Maybe. I can't find anything about the parade but I guess it wouldn't surprise me. As for accounts, I also saw reporting of dozens and hundreds. But I'm not going to defend scummy Russian bots or scummy Trump. My only point was that I'm still blaming HRC for being HRC. I also think the Russian probe in congress was a wasted opportunity for Dems to be focusing on something more effective. This Russian stuff was nowhere near the worst thing about Trump. Dems have to come up with something better than what they had then and have now. Time is running out.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on February 28, 2022, 12:45:13 PM
https://fivethirtyeight.com/videos/texas-may-have-the-worst-gerrymander-in-the-country/
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on February 28, 2022, 01:14:29 PM
Quote from: milk on February 24, 2022, 10:34:54 PM

Maybe. I can't find anything about the parade but I guess it wouldn't surprise me. As for accounts, I also saw reporting of dozens and hundreds. But I'm not going to defend scummy Russian bots or scummy Trump. My only point was that I'm still blaming HRC for being HRC. I also think the Russian probe in congress was a wasted opportunity for Dems to be focusing on something more effective. This Russian stuff was nowhere near the worst thing about Trump. Dems have to come up with something better than what they had then and have now. Time is running out.

I wasn't talking about bots. I was talking about Russian operatives—actual humans—in the US on diplomatic passports and working out of a Russian diplomatic facility. It was somewhere mid-Atlantic, Maryland or N. Virginia? In any case, Obama expelled them toward the end of his term. They had established online identities as Americans over a long period to gain credibility and influence.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on February 28, 2022, 01:34:14 PM
Opinion: Bill Barr's sudden conversion shows how Trump will keep haunting the GOP

By Paul Waldman
Columnist
Today at 12:48 p.m. EST

William P. Barr has traveled the road to Damascus and arrived with a book he'd like you to buy.

The former attorney general, whose tireless labors in President Donald Trump's service made him one of the most sinister villains in an administration brimming with moral depravity, is here to tell you that he was shocked, shocked by what he saw.

"Trump cared only about one thing: himself," Barr writes in a new book that is full of criticism of the former president. "Country and principle took second place."

You don't say.

Barr's conversion from Trump lackey to Trump critic is particularly vivid, but he might not be the last person to have such a change of heart. It all depends on how long Trump's hold on the Republican Party lasts, and how that shapes the ambitions of other Republicans.

Barr is in his 70s now, and he may not be eager for another government job, so a rehabilitation tour is in order. As a shrewd operator, Barr surely knows that history will not be kind to Trump, so he wants to make sure everyone knows how repulsed he was by what he saw.

But does he think we're going to just forget the way he enabled Trump's assault on the integrity of the Justice Department and the entire government? The way he misled the public about what was in the special counsel's report on Russian electoral interference to make Trump seem utterly innocent, when Barr had read the report but it had not yet been released?

The way he forced out U.S. attorneys who might investigate Trump? The way he spread preposterous lies about voter fraud in advance of the 2020 election? The way he took extraordinary steps to help Trump cronies escape accountability for their criminal conduct? Barr's name will forever be tied to Trump's, as it should be.

For other Republicans, this is a tricky moment, made deeply uncomfortable by the presence of a pro-Vladimir Putin wing within the GOP. Even if it consists primarily of Trump and the repellent Fox News host Tucker Carlson — who has gone from spreading covid disinformation to running segments so friendly toward Putin that they're replayed on Russian state TV — it was merely an embarrassment before now, rather than a political problem.

But with nearly the entire world united against Putin's invasion of Ukraine, Republicans find themselves caught between joining that popular cause and repudiating Trump, which no one who wants to have an electoral future in the GOP thinks they can do.

So on ABC's "This Week," host George Stephanopoulos tried to get Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) to condemn Trump's effusive praise of Putin's invasion, leaving Cotton to awkwardly dodge the question. Sensing blood, Stephanopoulos asked the question four times, and Cotton kept dodging.

As a Republican with presidential ambitions of his own, Cotton would almost certainly prefer that Trump fade away, or at least not run for the White House. Unfortunately, Trump seems to be doing just the opposite: Speaking at the Conservative Political Action Conference over the weekend, he again vowed another bid. "We did it twice, and we'll do it again," he said to the cheering crowd. "We're going to be doing it again a third time."

This is the ongoing dilemma for Republicans: When Trump gets attention these days, it's usually because he's facing more legal jeopardy for his ethically challenged business practices, or because he said something shocking or despicable. If Trump says, "Tax cuts are good and abortion is bad," it doesn't make news; if he offers tributes to murderous dictators, it does.

That means Republicans will keep getting asked to defend the worst of Trump's words and deeds. They might try to say it's not their business or they're concerned about more meaningful issues, but that just opens them up to more questions, given that there are few things reporters are more drawn to than intraparty tension.

Even if Trump doesn't run again in 2024, he will continue to hang over everything Republicans do. They'll have to answer for their own roles in enabling him. They'll have to say whether they agree with what he says. And they have to detail the limits of their future support for him.

There will be no resolution to this problem as long as Trump and Trumpism exist. Nor will Republicans escape their own recent pasts. No amount of tell-all books and pleas to move on will make Trump's aides and supporters emerge from this period looking unsullied.

But perhaps they knew this when Trump asked them to set fire to whatever integrity they had, to hitch their own ambitions to his debased crusade for self-aggrandizement, and they agreed. Barr was one of the most enthusiastic volunteers, and like the others, he will not be able to rewrite history. They made their bargain, and they cannot hide who they are and what they did.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on March 01, 2022, 06:22:17 PM
Without intending to I caught the whole of the State Of The Union on Al Jazeera

That's the best and strongest speech I've heard from Biden, especially in delivery.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: vandermolen on March 01, 2022, 11:27:47 PM
I got up in the middle of the night and switched on the TV just as Biden was starting his State of the Union address and listened to the whole Ukrainian section at the start. I was most impressed and it was the best speech which I have heard from President Biden. I was pleased to see that RT (Russia Today) was also broadcasting the speech live.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 02, 2022, 06:58:23 PM
Jan. 6 panel alleges Trump and allies engaged in 'criminal conspiracy'

By ERIC TUCKER, FARNOUSH AMIRI and MARY CLARE JALONICK The Associated Press, Updated March 2, 2022, 18 minutes ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — The House Committee investigating the U.S. Capitol insurrection said Wednesday night that its evidence shows former President Donald Trump and his associates engaged in a "criminal conspiracy" to prevent Congress from certifying the results of the presidential election, spread false information about it and pressured state officials to overturn the results.

The committee made the claims in a filing in response to a lawsuit by Trump adviser John Eastman. Eastman, a lawyer who was consulting with Trump as he attempted to overturn the election, is trying to withhold documents from the committee as it investigates the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection. The committee argued there is a legal exception allowing the disclosure of communications regarding ongoing or future crimes.

"The Select Committee also has a good-faith basis for concluding that the President and members of his Campaign engaged in a criminal conspiracy to defraud the United States," the committee wrote in a filing submitted in U.S. District Court in the Central District of California.

The 221-page filing marks the committee's most formal effort to link the former president to a federal crime, though the actual import of the filing is not clear since lawmakers do not have the power to bring charges on their own and can only make a referral to the Justice Department. The department has been investigating last year's riot, but has not given any indication that it is considering seeking charges against Trump.

"The evidence supports an inference that President Trump and members of his campaign knew he had not won enough legitimate state electoral votes to be declared the winner of the 2020 Presidential election during the January 6 Joint Session of Congress, but the President nevertheless sought to use the Vice President to manipulate the results in his favor," the filing states.

The brief filed Wednesday was in an effort by the committee to refute attorney-client privilege claims made by Eastman in order to withhold records from congressional investigators.

"The Select Committee is not conducting a criminal investigation," Mississippi Rep. Bennie Thompson, the committee's Democratic chairman, said in a statement. "But, as the judge noted at a previous hearing, Dr. Eastman's privilege claims raise the question whether the crime-fraud exception to the attorney-client privilege applies in this situation."

The filing also details excerpts from the committee's interviews with several top Trump aides and members of former Vice President Mike Pence's team, including chief of staff Marc Short and chief counsel Greg Jacob.

The committee said it found evidence that Trump sought to obstruct an official proceeding — in this case, the certification of the election results — by trying to strongarm Pence to delay the proceedings so there would be additional time to "manipulate" the results.

In a Jan. 6, 2021, email exchange between Eastman and Jacob, Eastman pushes for Pence to intervene in his ceremonial role of overseeing the certification of the electoral votes.

Jacob replies: "I respect your heart here. I share your concerns about what Democrats will do once in power. I want election integrity fixed. But I have run down every legal trail placed before me to its conclusion, and I respectfully conclude that as a legal framework, it is a results-oriented position that you would never support if attempted by the opposition, and essentially entirely made up."

He added, "And thanks to your bulls—-, we are now under siege."

In other transcripts released as part of the filing, former senior Justice Department official Richard Donoghue described trying to convince Trump that claims of election fraud were pure fiction. "I told the President myself that several times, in several conversations, that these allegations about ballots being smuggled in a suitcase and run through the machines several times, it was not true, that we had looked at it, we looked at the video, we interviewed the witnesses, and it was not true."

At one point, Donoghue said, he had to reassure Trump that the Justice Department had investigated a report that someone has transported a tractor-trailer full of ballots from New York to Pennsylvania. The department found no evidence to support the allegations, Donoghue said.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 03, 2022, 09:45:17 AM
Opinion: The Justice Dept. and the Jan. 6 inquiry make moves to snare Trump

By Jennifer Rubin
Columnist

Those criticizing Attorney General Merrick Garland for not moving expeditiously against former president Donald Trump for an attempted coup should take heart.

On Wednesday, we saw a matter-of-fact announcement from the Justice Department: "A regional leader of the Oath Keepers pleaded guilty today to seditious conspiracy and obstruction of an official proceeding for his actions before, during and after the breach of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. His and others' actions disrupted a joint session of the U.S. Congress convened to ascertain and count the electoral votes related to the presidential election." The announcement continued: "Joshua James, 34, of Arab, Alabama, pleaded guilty to seditious conspiracy in connection with the Capitol breach. As part of the plea agreement, James has agreed to cooperate with the government's ongoing investigation."

The definition of his crimes (seditious conspiracy and obstruction of an official proceeding) are precisely the ones that may best fit Trump's behavior both before and on Jan. 6. Also on Wednesday, the House Select Committee filed a brief in a court case disputing the attorney-client privilege raised in response to a subpoena by John Eastman, the lawyer who authored the infamous memo explaining how Trump could ignore the electoral count in President Biden 's favor. In a written statement the committee revealed, "The facts we've gathered strongly suggest that Dr. Eastman's emails may show that he helped Donald Trump advance a corrupt scheme to obstruct the counting of electoral college ballots and a conspiracy to impede the transfer of power."

In a filing in U.S. District Court in California seeking to enforce the subpoena, the committee states:

The evidence detailed above provides, at minimum, a good-faith basis for concluding that President Trump has violated section 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2). The elements of the offense under 1512(c)(2) are: (1) the defendant obstructed, influenced or impeded, or attempted to obstruct, influence or impede, (2) an official proceeding of the United States, and (3) that the defendant did so corruptly. . . . The Select Committee also has a good-faith basis for concluding that the President and members of his Campaign engaged in a criminal conspiracy to defraud the United States in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371.

Attached excerpts from interviews with witnesses before the committee set forth in granular detail conversations with Trump in which lawyers repeatedly told him that there was no evidence of fraud but he wanted to press ahead regardless.

Likewise, James's plea bargain affirms that these crimes — seditious conspiracy and obstruction of an official proceeding — apply to the events of Jan. 6. Now the question turns to who else was involved in the conspiracy and who else directly or indirectly participated in obstruction.

A conspiracy to impede the transfer of power could include, for example, promulgating the big lie, strong-arming Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to "find" just enough votes to flip the state, pressuring Michigan election officials not to certify the vote for Biden, organizing fake electors, cajoling Vice President Mike Pence to disregard the electoral count, badgering the Justice Department to declare the election "corrupt," working with congressmen to raise baseless objections to the electoral votes — and, ultimately, exhorting a mob to march on the Capitol when Congress was tabulating the electoral votes. Critical to that conspiracy was obstructing the congressional proceedings that officially would have announced Biden's victory.

The committee and the Justice Department are essentially working from both ends of possible conspiracy and obstruction charges. The Justice Department is working from the bottom up, as it would in an investigation of organized crime. Here the innocuous announcement that James "has agreed to cooperate" should serve as a flashing red light to Trump and his cronies, especially those aides who allegedly staked out a "command center" at the Willard hotel on Jan. 6. Knitting together the leaders of the mob on the Mall with the Trump cohorts involved in a "corrupt scheme to obstruct the counting of electoral college ballots and a conspiracy to impede the transfer of power," as the Jan. 6 committee put it, will be critical to tying Trump to the violent insurrection.

In a speech a year after the attack on the Capitol, Garland tried to assure the public that the Justice Department was neither dragging its feet nor ruling out prosecution of Trump. "In complex cases, initial charges are often less severe than later charged offenses. This is purposeful, as investigators methodically collect and sift through more evidence," he said. "The actions we have taken thus far will not be our last. The Justice Department remains committed to holding all January 6th perpetrators, at any level, accountable under law — whether they were present that day or were otherwise criminally responsible for the assault on our democracy." He added, "We will follow the facts wherever they lead."

From the committee's statements, the latest plea deal and the other seditious conspiracy charges, we see signs that the House and the Justice Department are proceeding along common legal theories that they both agree fit the general fact pattern. If the facts necessary to implicate Trump and his top advisers emerge, the Justice Department will be hard pressed to decline to prosecute.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: LKB on March 03, 2022, 02:46:04 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 03, 2022, 09:45:17 AM
Opinion: The Justice Dept. and the Jan. 6 inquiry make moves to snare Trump

By Jennifer Rubin
Columnist

Those criticizing Attorney General Merrick Garland for not moving expeditiously against former president Donald Trump for an attempted coup should take heart.

On Wednesday, we saw a matter-of-fact announcement from the Justice Department: "A regional leader of the Oath Keepers pleaded guilty today to seditious conspiracy and obstruction of an official proceeding for his actions before, during and after the breach of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. His and others' actions disrupted a joint session of the U.S. Congress convened to ascertain and count the electoral votes related to the presidential election." The announcement continued: "Joshua James, 34, of Arab, Alabama, pleaded guilty to seditious conspiracy in connection with the Capitol breach. As part of the plea agreement, James has agreed to cooperate with the government's ongoing investigation."

The definition of his crimes (seditious conspiracy and obstruction of an official proceeding) are precisely the ones that may best fit Trump's behavior both before and on Jan. 6. Also on Wednesday, the House Select Committee filed a brief in a court case disputing the attorney-client privilege raised in response to a subpoena by John Eastman, the lawyer who authored the infamous memo explaining how Trump could ignore the electoral count in President Biden 's favor. In a written statement the committee revealed, "The facts we've gathered strongly suggest that Dr. Eastman's emails may show that he helped Donald Trump advance a corrupt scheme to obstruct the counting of electoral college ballots and a conspiracy to impede the transfer of power."

In a filing in U.S. District Court in California seeking to enforce the subpoena, the committee states:

The evidence detailed above provides, at minimum, a good-faith basis for concluding that President Trump has violated section 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2). The elements of the offense under 1512(c)(2) are: (1) the defendant obstructed, influenced or impeded, or attempted to obstruct, influence or impede, (2) an official proceeding of the United States, and (3) that the defendant did so corruptly. . . . The Select Committee also has a good-faith basis for concluding that the President and members of his Campaign engaged in a criminal conspiracy to defraud the United States in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371.

Attached excerpts from interviews with witnesses before the committee set forth in granular detail conversations with Trump in which lawyers repeatedly told him that there was no evidence of fraud but he wanted to press ahead regardless.

Likewise, James's plea bargain affirms that these crimes — seditious conspiracy and obstruction of an official proceeding — apply to the events of Jan. 6. Now the question turns to who else was involved in the conspiracy and who else directly or indirectly participated in obstruction.

A conspiracy to impede the transfer of power could include, for example, promulgating the big lie, strong-arming Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to "find" just enough votes to flip the state, pressuring Michigan election officials not to certify the vote for Biden, organizing fake electors, cajoling Vice President Mike Pence to disregard the electoral count, badgering the Justice Department to declare the election "corrupt," working with congressmen to raise baseless objections to the electoral votes — and, ultimately, exhorting a mob to march on the Capitol when Congress was tabulating the electoral votes. Critical to that conspiracy was obstructing the congressional proceedings that officially would have announced Biden's victory.

The committee and the Justice Department are essentially working from both ends of possible conspiracy and obstruction charges. The Justice Department is working from the bottom up, as it would in an investigation of organized crime. Here the innocuous announcement that James "has agreed to cooperate" should serve as a flashing red light to Trump and his cronies, especially those aides who allegedly staked out a "command center" at the Willard hotel on Jan. 6. Knitting together the leaders of the mob on the Mall with the Trump cohorts involved in a "corrupt scheme to obstruct the counting of electoral college ballots and a conspiracy to impede the transfer of power," as the Jan. 6 committee put it, will be critical to tying Trump to the violent insurrection.

In a speech a year after the attack on the Capitol, Garland tried to assure the public that the Justice Department was neither dragging its feet nor ruling out prosecution of Trump. "In complex cases, initial charges are often less severe than later charged offenses. This is purposeful, as investigators methodically collect and sift through more evidence," he said. "The actions we have taken thus far will not be our last. The Justice Department remains committed to holding all January 6th perpetrators, at any level, accountable under law — whether they were present that day or were otherwise criminally responsible for the assault on our democracy." He added, "We will follow the facts wherever they lead."

From the committee's statements, the latest plea deal and the other seditious conspiracy charges, we see signs that the House and the Justice Department are proceeding along common legal theories that they both agree fit the general fact pattern. If the facts necessary to implicate Trump and his top advisers emerge, the Justice Department will be hard pressed to decline to prosecute.

Excepting Putin's death/retirement/ imprisonment, nothing would please me more than the former dickhead-in-chief's indictment. Go, DoJ...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: T. D. on March 03, 2022, 03:02:11 PM
Speaking of dickheads, lots of stuff with this slogan around:

(https://scontent-bos3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.18169-9/10505404_1442799275994249_9058811897821561260_n.png?stp=dst-png_p206x206&_nc_cat=107&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=85a577&_nc_ohc=xjAAnTSbSg8AX9DZLCf&_nc_ht=scontent-bos3-1.xx&oh=00_AT-kZhi-zuby84L6ojsbAZrn3RDnOF1KmgaoKf9cFN7cig&oe=6244F356)
(https://scontent-bos3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.18169-9/10471507_651533368259290_8295032276857491339_n.jpg?_nc_cat=109&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=09cbfe&_nc_ohc=y4Vw0sWjJTcAX_o5nS0&_nc_ht=scontent-bos3-1.xx&oh=00_AT_dtc9vLbKXGEcx-OnOihzi1a1hM35lFGWR1BegtIsK6A&oe=6245A169)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 03, 2022, 06:59:40 PM

     Operation TrumPutin just might fall apart at both ends all at once.

     Former Fox News Director Jack Hanick Indicted for Helping Russia (https://www.thedailybeast.com/former-fox-news-producter-for-sean-hannity-jack-hanick-indicted-for-helping-russia?ref=home)

     I'm a Former Russian TV Anchor. Fox News Mimics State TV (https://www.thedailybeast.com/im-a-former-russian-tv-anchor-right-wing-media-mimics-russian-media)

Among the Americans that currently host television shows on RT are a range of voices on the extreme ends of the left-right ideological spectrum. Scottie Nell Hughes, a former pro-Trump pundit on CNN and Fox News, hosts a show that claims to provide unbiased coverage, while Canadian actor William Shatner hosts a program where he uses his star power to interview other celebrities like astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson. Far-left journalist Chris Hedges, meanwhile, hosts a show featuring "dissident voices," ostensibly dedicated to the cause of anti-imperialism, yet has failed to even mention Russia's actual attempted authoritarian land grab of a democracy.

Other American voices frequently amplified on RT include former Democratic congresswoman-turned-CPAC speaker Tulsi Gabbard, libertarian politician Ron Paul, and his son, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY)—all of whom share foreign policy positions that Russia now finds beneficial to amplify.


     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on March 04, 2022, 04:22:52 AM
Quote from: drogulus on March 03, 2022, 06:59:40 PM
     Operation TrumPutin just might fall apart at both ends all at once.

     Former Fox News Director Jack Hanick Indicted for Helping Russia (https://www.thedailybeast.com/former-fox-news-producter-for-sean-hannity-jack-hanick-indicted-for-helping-russia?ref=home)

     I'm a Former Russian TV Anchor. Fox News Mimics State TV (https://www.thedailybeast.com/im-a-former-russian-tv-anchor-right-wing-media-mimics-russian-media)

Among the Americans that currently host television shows on RT are a range of voices on the extreme ends of the left-right ideological spectrum. Scottie Nell Hughes, a former pro-Trump pundit on CNN and Fox News, hosts a show that claims to provide unbiased coverage, while Canadian actor William Shatner hosts a program where he uses his star power to interview other celebrities like astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson. Far-left journalist Chris Hedges, meanwhile, hosts a show featuring "dissident voices," ostensibly dedicated to the cause of anti-imperialism, yet has failed to even mention Russia's actual attempted authoritarian land grab of a democracy.

Other American voices frequently amplified on RT include former Democratic congresswoman-turned-CPAC speaker Tulsi Gabbard, libertarian politician Ron Paul, and his son, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY)—all of whom share foreign policy positions that Russia now finds beneficial to amplify.


RT (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT_(TV_network)), (which doesn't broadcast in Russia), is Putin's state sponsored & controlled, "Merchant of Doubt" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchants_of_Doubt) that aims to spread misinformation to world audiences.  Though not a blatant as some American and other Right-wing, conspiracy-mongering, anti-science sites and blogs, the intent is even more cynically intended to undermine confidence in western democratic governments and institutions.

As for Chris Hedges, I've read several of his books, and IMO, I find him not so much "far-Left" as merely eccentric.  Though I often find myself agreeing with his observations and reason on specific aspects I tend to find many of his overall conclusions pretty whacky.  I'd say Hedges' whackyness and often perverse eccentricity serves RT's agenda very well.

Chris Hedges, (together with Putin), flogs the notion (https://youtu.be/_I6ZkPi6NSI?t=165) that NATO promised not to expand eastward at the time of unification of Germany, and that Russia as a "legitimate fear of encirclement" by hostile nations lead by the USA.  This whole line of reasoning is BS.

For a start, there has never been any evidence that NATO planned to preemptively invade Soviet or Russian territory.  It's bogus to see NATO's military potential as a threat unless that potential is used in response to Russia's own military forces.

Other than that, from early in his presidency it's well-know that Putin consider the dissolution of the Soviet Union to be "The greatest geo-political tragedy of the 20th century" (https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2014/mar/06/john-bolton/did-vladimir-putin-call-breakup-ussr-greatest-geop/).  For their part, eastern European nations remember not only Soviet occupation of their countries but also the Tsarist Russian empire.  Reasonably, they were eager to join NATO, and existing NATO members have done nothing other than to oblige them.

To me it's utterly clear that Putin's actions stem from is romantic dream of a reconstituted Russian empire, and nothing at all to do with Russian security interests, much less his stated intent to "de-Nazify" Ukraine.  There has been nothing but lies and disinformation coming out of Russia.

At this point we should understand that the USA's and NATO's direct military inaction in Ukraine is appeasement of Russia -- with the legitimate intent of not participating a nuclear war which Putin by now has threatened.  However unless we are willing to allow surrounding nations' freedom destroyed and a neo-Tsarist empire created, the time to draw the line is now.  Guarantees to the Baltic nations, for example, for military assistance must total and unequivocal.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: LKB on March 04, 2022, 06:45:45 AM
Direct military action by the US and/or NATO against Russian forces MUST remain out of the question, regardless of the situation within Ukraine.

While the arguments for direct intervention certainly are worthy in terms of saving innocent lives, defending Ukraine's independence ( if not their very existence ) and punishing Putin, the ramifications would be practically endless; Putin could point to such actions as justification for the full range of retaliatory options available to him, and not just in Ukraine or Europe but everywhere.

As frustrating as things are having to witness these crimes, a strike by NATO or any member nation against Russia could light the fuse for the true ( and probably terminal ) World War III.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on March 04, 2022, 06:51:07 AM
The correct response to Russia is long term. Develop sufficient energy sources (hopefully including a lot of non-fossil fuel sources) that make Russia's energy production non-essential to the world economy.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 04, 2022, 06:51:18 AM
Quote from: LKB on March 04, 2022, 06:45:45 AM
Direct military action by the US and/or NATO against Russian forces MUST remain out of the question, regardless of the situation within Ukraine.

No doubt!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on March 04, 2022, 06:52:04 AM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on March 04, 2022, 06:51:07 AM
The correct response to Russia is long term. Develop sufficient energy sources (hopefully including a lot of non-fossil fuel sources) that make Russia's energy production non-essential to the world economy.

Putin has played the long game. It is time we learnt to.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on March 04, 2022, 10:01:00 AM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on March 04, 2022, 06:51:07 AM
The correct response to Russia is long term. Develop sufficient energy sources (hopefully including a lot of non-fossil fuel sources) that make Russia's energy production non-essential to the world economy.

Angela Merkel made the big mistake phasing out nuclear energy in Germany.  Her government insisted they had replaced the nuclear with renewable sources.  OK, but as I hear it, Germany's dependency on oil and gas was not reduced at all. I.e. one emissions-free resource was replaced by another to no avail in terms of reducing greenhouse gas, all the while not reducing need for foreign, fossil fuel resources.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on March 04, 2022, 10:06:14 AM
Quote from: LKB on March 04, 2022, 06:45:45 AM
Direct military action by the US and/or NATO against Russian forces MUST remain out of the question, regardless of the situation within Ukraine.

While the arguments for direct intervention certainly are worthy in terms of saving innocent lives, defending Ukraine's independence ( if not their very existence ) and punishing Putin, the ramifications would be practically endless; Putin could point to such actions as justification for the full range of retaliatory options available to him, and not just in Ukraine or Europe but everywhere.

As frustrating as things are having to witness these crimes, a strike by NATO or any member nation against Russia could light the fuse for the true ( and probably terminal ) World War III.

I do agree that direct US/NATO intervention must not happen with respect to Ukraine.  But it must be very clear that it will if Russia undertakes the same aggression against the Baltic nations that would otherwise be his likely next targets.

Given Baltic NATO membership and that resolve, Putin will likely look east towards the "Stans" -- too bad for them.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 05, 2022, 05:32:52 AM
Quote from: LKB on March 04, 2022, 06:45:45 AM
Direct military action by the US and/or NATO against Russian forces MUST remain out of the question, regardless of the situation within Ukraine.

While the arguments for direct intervention certainly are worthy in terms of saving innocent lives, defending Ukraine's independence ( if not their very existence ) and punishing Putin, the ramifications would be practically endless; Putin could point to such actions as justification for the full range of retaliatory options available to him, and not just in Ukraine or Europe but everywhere.

As frustrating as things are having to witness these crimes, a strike by NATO or any member nation against Russia could light the fuse for the true ( and probably terminal ) World War III.

Agreed. The best course of action is cooperation between secret services of the West and Russia for ousting Putin and giving compensation to Russia (Crimea, the currently Russian-held territory of Luhansk and Donetsk, military neutrality for the rest of the country).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 05, 2022, 05:36:01 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on March 04, 2022, 10:01:00 AM
Angela Merkel made the big mistake phasing out nuclear energy in Germany. 

She should be trialed for high treason, along with Gerhard Schroeder.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on March 05, 2022, 05:43:01 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on March 04, 2022, 04:22:52 AM
To me it's utterly clear that Putin's actions stem from is romantic dream of a reconstituted Russian empire USSR.

Fixed.

QuoteGuarantees to the Baltic nations, for example, for military assistance must total and unequivocal.

The Baltic republics are members of NATO*. A Russian attack on any of them is equivalent to a Russian attack on the USA. What more total and unequivocal guarantee for military assistance could you wish for?

* and so is Romania, for that matter.

While a NATO-Russia war, ie WW3, cannot be dismissed out of hand, I think its probability is infinitesimal.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Iota on March 05, 2022, 10:29:53 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 04, 2022, 06:52:04 AM
Putin has played the long game. It is time we learnt to.

He has a more-or-less de facto political tenure of course, giving him a distinct advantage. One of the downsides of Western democratic systems is the discouragement of long-term planning. The constant scrabble for popularity, often sidelines it for focus group thinking, alas.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on March 06, 2022, 03:47:35 AM
Quote from: Florestan on March 05, 2022, 05:43:01 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on March 04, 2022, 04:22:52 AM
To me it's utterly clear that Putin's actions stem from is romantic dream of a reconstituted Russian empire USSR ...
Fixed.

I think that's splitting hairs a bit too fine.  Putin has no interest in bringing back USSR-style central planning, etc.  He is perfectly happy with the current Russian-style authoritarian kleptocracy.

Quote from: Florestan on March 05, 2022, 05:43:01 AM
The Baltic republics are members of NATO*. A Russian attack on any of them is equivalent to a Russian attack on the USA. What more total and unequivocal guarantee for military assistance could you wish for?

* and so is Romania, for that matter.

While a NATO-Russia war, ie WW3, cannot be dismissed out of hand, I think its probability is infinitesimal.

Yet if pressed militarily in Ukraine Putin could decide push the nuclear button as he has threatened.  Putin understands that concerted NATO action, (which he's beginning to realize is possible), could easily defeat Russia in a conventional war.  Putin clears sees the nuclear threat as his umbrella of protection against NATO intervention -- and we can't be sure how crazy he really is.

OTOH, I believe he doesn't want nuclear war and sees only as a last resort.  All the more reason to make it very clear that use of force against he Baltic states will be resisted in kind.

Look out Moldova who will be next if Putin succeeds in Ukraine because it isn't a NATO member.  The "stans" in central Asia could follow although threatening them would quickly raise Chinese objections.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on March 06, 2022, 08:13:29 AM

     As fond as Putin might be for Stalin, his hero is Alexander III.


     
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on April 28, 2022, 05:41:54 AM
Geo. Will: The 328 senators of the previous 50 years have illustrated the tyranny of the bell-shaped curve: a few of them dreadful, a few excellent, most mediocre. Although Josh Hawley, Missouri's freshman Republican, might not be worse than all the other 327, he exemplifies the worst about would-be presidents incubated in the Senate. Arriving there in January 2019, he hit the ground running — away from the Senate. Twenty-four months later, he was the principal catalyst of the attempted nullification of the presidential election preceding the one that he hopes will elevate him. Nimbly clambering aboard every passing bandwagon that can carry him to the Fox News greenroom, he treats the Senate as a mere steppingstone for his ascent to an office commensurate with his estimate of his talents.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 21, 2022, 11:42:07 AM
The Challenge of Diversity (with Yascha Mounk) (https://www.thebulwark.com/podcast-episode/the-challenge-of-diversity-with-yascha-mounk/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 21, 2022, 12:34:33 PM
Kim Wehle: A Deep Dive on Roe (https://www.thebulwark.com/podcast-episode/kim-wehle-a-deep-dive-on-roe-2/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 25, 2022, 08:02:35 AM
So much for the wankmaggot dotard's endorsement:

Former U.S. senator David Perdue lost Georgia's Republican primary for governor to incumbent Brian Kemp by a stunning 52 points.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 25, 2022, 08:06:49 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 25, 2022, 08:02:35 AM
So much for the wankmaggot dotard's endorsement:

Former U.S. senator David Perdue lost Georgia's Republican primary for governor to incumbent Brian Kemp by a stunning 52 points.

Quote from: Dana MilbankThe back-to-back appeals to violence and white supremacy provide a caution to those celebrating Trump's apparent loss of his kingmaker status in Republican politics: As ugly as things have been with Trump holding an iron grip over the GOP, they could actually get worse if he feels his grasp slipping and becomes even more incendiary in his provocations.

Opinion  As Trump loses kingmaker status, he becomes more dangerous
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 25, 2022, 01:06:53 PM
Will Biden Run in 2024? (https://thetriad.thebulwark.com/p/will-biden-run-in-2024?s=r)

Spoiler: There is no alternative.

I've been saying since November 2020 that, barring a health event, Biden will run for re-election in 2024 for one simple reason: There is no other option.

The Democratic coalition is currently made up of a giant mass of factions, some of which are in tension. They cannot win the presidency without getting close to 52 percent of the popular vote and even that margin gives them only about a 50-50 shot of winning the Electoral College.

Democrats need to hold together (and turn out) progressives, African Americans, young voters, women, Hispanics, and college-educated suburban voters. They need to do this without losing even more ground to white, high-school-educated men.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on May 25, 2022, 07:14:47 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 25, 2022, 01:06:53 PM
Democrats need to hold together (and turn out) progressives, African Americans, young voters, women, Hispanics, and college-educated suburban voters. They need to do this without losing even more ground to white, high-school-educated men.
Pathetic that politics is like this, it's all just tribalist bullshit.
How about... both Democrats and Republicans try to appeal to people instead of demographics? No division, no hatred, no discrimination. Most of our needs are the same, our enemies aren't each other, but people who abuse power and make us all suffer.
Just a general statement, not trying to diss the writer.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on May 25, 2022, 07:46:08 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 25, 2022, 01:06:53 PM
Will Biden Run in 2024? (https://thetriad.thebulwark.com/p/will-biden-run-in-2024?s=r)

Spoiler: There is no alternative.

I've been saying since November 2020 that, barring a health event, Biden will run for re-election in 2024 for one simple reason: There is no other option.

The Democratic coalition is currently made up of a giant mass of factions, some of which are in tension. They cannot win the presidency without getting close to 52 percent of the popular vote and even that margin gives them only about a 50-50 shot of winning the Electoral College.

Democrats need to hold together (and turn out) progressives, African Americans, young voters, women, Hispanics, and college-educated suburban voters. They need to do this without losing even more ground to white, high-school-educated men.

In the academic field, there is so-called Rising American Electorate theory: population of Democratic constituents are increasing and that of GOP declining, so Democratic Party will have an electoral advantage in near future. Though this is a good description of party politics now, unless stupid, Republicans will change some policy proposals and/or present new agendas to win new constituents.   ;D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Mirror Image on May 25, 2022, 08:02:32 PM
Quote from: greg on May 25, 2022, 07:14:47 PM
Pathetic that politics is like this, it's all just tribalist bullshit.
How about... both Democrats and Republicans try to appeal to people instead of demographics? No division, no hatred, no discrimination. Most of our needs are the same, our enemies aren't each other, but people who abuse power and make us all suffer.
Just a general statement, not trying to diss the writer.

As long as those in power or the media who spreads misinformation create these divisions, this country will never be truly united. I take umbrage with this writer's classification of Republican voters as "white high school-educated men". Why mention anything about race at all or why single out a particular group? There's no need in it. Also, there's plenty of highly educated men and women who have voted Republican and there will continue to be. This article should've never been allowed to be published.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 26, 2022, 06:35:25 AM
Quote from: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on May 25, 2022, 07:46:08 PM
In the academic field, there is so-called Rising American Electorate theory: population of Democratic constituents are increasing and that of GOP declining, so Democratic Party will have an electoral advantage in near future. Though this is a good description of party politics now, unless stupid, Republicans will change some policy proposals and/or present new agendas to win new constituents.   ;D

No, they're going to rig things so that they can rule with their white-grievance minority.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 26, 2022, 06:38:12 AM
Quote from: Mirror Image on May 25, 2022, 08:02:32 PM
I take umbrage with this writer's classification of Republican voters as "white high school-educated men".

That's not accurate. You are confusing subset with the entire class.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on May 26, 2022, 06:56:50 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 26, 2022, 06:35:25 AM
No, they're going to rig things so that they can rule with their white-grievance minority.

Many research/statistical findings show that the degree of white voters' concern of declining racial hierarchy is the most influential factor for their vote decision (who they vote for) in the 20016/20 elections. Ideology, policy, economy, voters economic class, etc were much less influential on white voters vote decisions though they won't perceive or admit it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on May 26, 2022, 07:57:36 AM
Quote from: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on May 26, 2022, 06:56:50 AM
Many research/statistical findings show that the degree of white voters' concern of declining racial hierarchy is the most influential factor for their vote decision (who they vote for) in the 20016/20 elections. Ideology, policy, economy, voters economic class, etc were much less influential on white voters vote decisions though they won't perceive or admit it.

This doesn't surprise me in the least.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on May 27, 2022, 08:05:00 PM
Quote from: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on May 26, 2022, 06:56:50 AM
Many research/statistical findings show that the degree of white voters' concern of declining racial hierarchy is the most influential factor for their vote decision (who they vote for) in the 20016/20 elections. Ideology, policy, economy, voters economic class, etc were much less influential on white voters vote decisions though they won't perceive or admit it.
So they won't admit it, yet the research claims to read their minds? What would be the method for determining that? If they are making assumptions then publishing stuff like that is only going to fan the flames of division and hatred. Never known a white person that felt this way, but perhaps if a survey were done in Hicktown, Alabama then it would be easy to believe.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on June 01, 2022, 12:25:17 PM
Althou I don't follow US politics as much as I used to I noticed it has now RETROGRADED into

Peach Tree Dish!
;D  :laugh:
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: LKB on June 01, 2022, 12:43:39 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on June 01, 2022, 12:25:17 PM
Althou I don't follow US politics as much as I used to I noticed it has now evolved into

Peach Tree Dish!
;D  :laugh:


I must cry foul. Usage of the word " evolved " in connexion with MTG is surely forbidden, regardless of context.  :P
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on June 01, 2022, 01:10:57 PM
Quote from: LKB on June 01, 2022, 12:43:39 PM
I must cry foul. Usage of the word " evolved " in connexion with MTG is surely forbidden, regardless of context.  :P

Fair enough! I changed the word to something more appropriate I think.  ;)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 01, 2022, 04:41:01 PM
Opinion  The GOP midterm wave is set — and Democrats can't do anything about it (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/01/gop-midterm-wave-is-set-democrats-cant-do-anything-about-it/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on June 03, 2022, 05:58:20 AM
Our judicial system works (sometimes). Michael Avenatti sentenced to 4 years for stealing nearly $300K from Stormy Daniels



https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/02/politics/michael-avenatti-stormy-daniels-sentencing/index.html
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on June 03, 2022, 06:54:45 AM
Quote from: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on June 03, 2022, 05:58:20 AM
Our judicial system works (sometimes). Michael Avenatti sentenced to 4 years for stealing nearly $300K from Stormy Daniels

https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/02/politics/michael-avenatti-stormy-daniels-sentencing/index.html

If a non-rich african american stole $300K, the sentence would be much much longer.  :P
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 03, 2022, 07:13:05 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on June 03, 2022, 06:54:45 AM
If a non-rich african american stole $300K, the sentence would be much much longer.  :P

Or even if rich. They'll park Avenatti in the men's equivalent of Camp Cupcake, I expect.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on June 03, 2022, 01:39:15 PM
Friends, I just wanted to mention, and recommend, two fine news sites.


Scientific American

https://www.scientificamerican.com/


The Conversation

https://theconversation.com/us
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 03, 2022, 01:43:16 PM
Quote from: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on June 03, 2022, 01:39:15 PM
Friends, I just wanted to mention, and recommend, two fine news sites.


Scientific American

https://www.scientificamerican.com/


The Conversation

https://theconversation.com/us


Thanks!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on June 03, 2022, 01:46:07 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 03, 2022, 01:43:16 PM
Thanks!

Have a great weekend Karl! (I love Boston Globe).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 03, 2022, 01:46:42 PM
Quote from: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on June 03, 2022, 01:46:07 PM
Have a great weekend Karl! (I love Boston Globe).

A good weekend to you, as well!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 11, 2022, 06:56:25 AM
Everybody knew that Donald Trump was lying about the election being stolen, but still they went along with it. (https://www.thebulwark.com/podcast-episode/this-is-what-democracy-looks-like/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on June 12, 2022, 05:30:33 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 26, 2022, 06:35:25 AM
No, they're going to rig things so that they can rule with their white-grievance minority.
Is characterizing conservatives this way good for the Democratic Party? I agree that the Republican part can't be saved if its identity is 1/6 and that always-trump will eventually lead them to ruin. But there's a serious problem on the left: identitarianism and the gifting of one part of the electorate, as defined this way by Democrats, to the Republicans.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on June 12, 2022, 07:05:17 PM
Quote from: Yabetz on June 12, 2022, 06:15:48 PM
And that's solely the fault of the Democrats. Too many people are fed up with identity politics, and that -- along with constant Trump-hate -- is all the Democrats have to offer anymore. They're even in the process of losing the Latino vote...which they thought would give them an electoral lock for all eternity. On the other hand the Republican establishment is still stuck on the same mantras they've had since at least the 80s and probably long before that.

What's gone wrong is the death of give-and-take, win-some-lose-some classical liberalism. There is no "loyal opposition" anymore. It's now scorched-earth, win at all costs blood sport, with less and less serving as unifying symbols or ideals. I think the US is headed for internal disintegration, to be honest.

The people became more ideological and ex-liberal Republicans and ex-conservative Democrats changed the party. Plus because of polarization in income and ideology and gerrymandering, there are fewer centrist, mixed districts/states. A great majority of districts are Democratic dominant or GOP dominant districts. In such districts/states, centrist/moderate candidates will lose in primaries. You need to be ideologically extreme in order to win primaries. Therefore, we see more ideologicalized legislators in Congress. If they make compromises, they will lose in next primaries.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on June 13, 2022, 02:34:58 AM
Quote from: Yabetz on June 12, 2022, 06:15:48 PM
And that's solely the fault of the Democrats.

Yes. They are weak and hopeless. They are the "do nothing" party.

Quote from: Yabetz on June 12, 2022, 06:15:48 PMToo many people are fed up with identity politics, and that -- along with constant Trump-hate -- is all the Democrats have to offer anymore.

Both the Republicans and the Democrats have hardly anything to offer, but the difference is the Republicans are much much better at selling what they are offering (lower taxes for the rich, racism, xenophobia, anti-abortion, gun rights, theocracy,...)

Quote from: Yabetz on June 12, 2022, 06:15:48 PMThey're even in the process of losing the Latino vote...which they thought would give them an electoral lock for all eternity. On the other hand the Republican establishment is still stuck on the same mantras they've had since at least the 80s and probably long before that.

Part of this is because of gerrymandering and other things to make voting difficult. In Finland election days are Sundays and it has never took me more than 10 minutes to vote (typically 2 minutes). Compare that to the US, where voting happens on Tuesdays and can take hours to do. No wonder a lot people don't vote at all.

Quote from: Yabetz on June 12, 2022, 06:15:48 PMWhat's gone wrong is the death of give-and-take, win-some-lose-some classical liberalism. There is no "loyal opposition" anymore. It's now scorched-earth, win at all costs blood sport, with less and less serving as unifying symbols or ideals. I think the US is headed for internal disintegration, to be honest.

Both parties benefit from the other one being the enemy. It is easier to collect campaign donations when the enemy has to be defeated. The US is a very unstable society. I don't know if it will disintegrate, but it is a country that operates far below its potential offering ridiculously low quality of living to many of its citizens compared to how rich and powerful the country is. The first thing that should happen in the US is to get money out of politics. Before that happens there is very little that can be done to improve anything. The problem is its nearly impossible to get money out of politics once it has gotten there.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on June 13, 2022, 06:55:28 AM
Quote from: Yabetz on June 13, 2022, 05:40:16 AM
Well if the Republicans can be called theocratic racists, then the Democrats can be called utopian socialists...and frankly the former do a better job at leaving me alone than the latter. I'm not a member of either party.

Republicans can be called  theocratic racists to some extend (some of them more than others of course). They like to use the Bible (rather than science for example) as an excuse to their politics (even when the Bible opposes to those views!). Their politics is also clearly racist in its goal to maintain white power.

Democrats on the other hand are lightyears from utopian socialists including the most left members such as Bernie Sanders and AOC who are Social democrats while most of the party are right wing Republican lights, effectively crony capitalists, which you could call supporters of socialism for the rich, but people don't mean that when they call the Dems socialists. They aren't utopian either, because even the left wing ideas they advocate are commonplace in Europe for example. They are tested and successful. You could say that the left wing economic policies are utopian in an oligarchy, but that is not the reason why people call the ideas utopian. That's just a reason to take money out of politics to end the oligarchy!

You don't want to be left alone in all situations. If I for example get seriously sick, I want the society help me so that I don't die or go bankrupt. I am also happy living in a country that tries to take care of its citizens so that the streets are not full of homeless people and I don't need to fear getting robbed and so on. Yeah, I probably pay more taxes than you, but a happy society teaches people that there is more to good life than hoarding as much money as you can. After the basic needs are taken care of and then little extra, more money doesn't really matter. It just changes the style you live your life. The problem is that the US struggle to provide the basic stuff for many people even when it easily could changing the priorities.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 13, 2022, 07:31:42 AM
Quote from: Yabetz on June 13, 2022, 05:40:16 AM
Yeah, but to be fair we had 5+ years of hearing how the 2016 election was "stolen", likewise based on a lie from people who just will not accept a loss.

Your prefatory and vacuous "to be fair" is a bit cute. If you don't see the difference between Al Gore conceding the election, and the wankmaggot dotard's scheming, you need a new oculist. I question your moral compass also with your dismissal of finding credible evidence of wrong-doing on Trump's part (and lawful citizens considering that he is not above the law) as Trump-hate. you're drinking out of the toilet on this one.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on June 13, 2022, 08:43:28 AM
Quote from: Yabetz on June 13, 2022, 08:18:09 AM
Zero evidence of any "Russian collusion". The thing is, every time the Democrats lose elections they wuz robbed. Any time they win, it's treason to question the outcome.

The establishment was forced to lie, because they can't admit their fails. Hillary Clinton was a very lousy and entitled candidate who might have won in 1992, but not in the era of political populism against a super-populist Trump. The difference is that the Dems do it to save their faces while the the Reps try to change the outcome of the elections. There was no insurrection to the capitol in January 2017 to hang Biden, but there was one in January 2021 to hang Pence.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on June 13, 2022, 09:59:35 AM
Quote from: Yabetz on June 13, 2022, 08:18:09 AM
Zero evidence of any "Russian collusion". The thing is, every time the Democrats lose elections they wuz robbed. Any time they win, it's treason to question the outcome.

Amazing. At this late date another who has never bothered to read the Mueller report but insists on spouting off. RNC polling data was provided on a regular basis by the Trump campaign to Russian operatives, notably Konstantin Kilimnik, and used by Russian disinformation specialists to target messaging in battleground states. The leverage for this was Paul Manafort's eleven million dollar debt to Oleg Deripaska, who dropped his suit for the recovery of this debt once the information started flowing. Then, of course, the obvious: Trump, on the day an embarrassing tape of him bragging about serial sexual assaults became public, asked on national TV that the Russians help in exposing Hillary's missing emails, followed the next day by a Russian hacking campaign to do just that. Then there was the Trump Tower meeting where three Trump clowns attempted to barter for information discrediting Clinton but were too stupid to understand the quid pro quo required by the other side.

Quote from: 71 dB on June 13, 2022, 08:43:28 AM
The establishment was forced to lie, because they can't admit their fails. Hillary Clinton was a very lousy and entitled candidate who might have won in 1992, but not in the era of political populism against a super-populist Trump.

See above.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on June 13, 2022, 12:07:49 PM
Trumpniks colluding with Russia obviously happened.
Hillary being arrogant, entitled, with more than a scent of corruption about her, and not a great candidate is true as well.  The Russian meddling merely amplified the effects of that.
So Yabetz is wrong but 71dB is right.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on June 13, 2022, 12:18:18 PM
The "yahoos" were fully armed and trying to force Congress to proclaim Trump as winner of the 2020 election, instigated by Trump and his allies. They were trying to kill the Constitution.

Quote from: Yabetz on June 13, 2022, 12:12:37 PM
"Obviously happened"? Prove it. And how did "Russian meddling" amplify Hillary Clinton's minuses? What was it, $100k in Facebook ads? Let's talk about Hillary/DNC  dealings with Russian assets.

Basil gave that information.
May not have changed any votes does not mean it didn't happen.

You need to watch something other than Fox News.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on June 13, 2022, 01:21:09 PM
Quote from: Yabetz on June 13, 2022, 12:10:14 PM
No there wasn't. It was a bunch of unarmed yahoos who thought they were being snookered by a rigged election. The summer before that we had entire city blocks being looted and burned.

Trump himself encouraged them to go there. A lot of GOP voters believe Trump won:

https://www.newsweek.com/59-gop-voters-say-believing-trump-won-2020-important-being-republican-poll-1628281

Looting and burning stuff is obviously wrong, but a lot of Americans are frustrated and fed up with the politicians not serving them and how the police operates.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 13, 2022, 01:22:47 PM
When Barr says Trump is full of shit, he's a "Democratic stooge," right?

Barr testified in his deposition that at one point, Trump yelled at him and the White House counsel. "[He] was as mad as I've ever seen him, and he was trying to control himself," Barr said. He paraphrased Trump's reply: "Well, this is, you know, killing me. You didn't have to say this. You must've said this because you hate Trump." Barr went through evidence to debunk allegations of fraud in Detroit. He called the claims about Dominion voting machines "idiotic." Trump was "indignant." The next day, Trump reiterated on Fox News the same claims Barr had debunked.

On Dec. 14, Trump again insisted there was fraud, claiming it meant he would have a "second term." Barr observed that Trump had "become detached from reality" and reiterated that "the election was not stolen by fraud." He was convinced Trump "wasn't listening."


Id est, as we knew all along, the only fraud in the election was named Trump.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 13, 2022, 01:29:14 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 13, 2022, 01:22:47 PM
When Barr says Trump is full of shit, he's a "Democratic stooge," right?

Barr testified in his deposition that at one point, Trump yelled at him and the White House counsel. "[He] was as mad as I've ever seen him, and he was trying to control himself," Barr said. He paraphrased Trump's reply: "Well, this is, you know, killing me. You didn't have to say this. You must've said this because you hate Trump." Barr went through evidence to debunk allegations of fraud in Detroit. He called the claims about Dominion voting machines "idiotic." Trump was "indignant." The next day, Trump reiterated on Fox News the same claims Barr had debunked.

On Dec. 14, Trump again insisted there was fraud, claiming it meant he would have a "second term." Barr observed that Trump had "become detached from reality" and reiterated that "the election was not stolen by fraud." He was convinced Trump "wasn't listening."


Id est, as we knew all along, the only fraud in the election was named Trump.

Nor were Trump's calls for violence restricted to the date of 6 January:

Pak's testimony seems to confirms the widely held opinion of many legal experts that prosecution of Trump for his actions to pressure Georgia state election officials might be the easily proven aspect of Trump's coup attempt.

Barr's testimony similarly debunked the claim that there were more votes than voters in Philadelphia, which Barr called "rubbish." Philadelphia's former Republican city commissioner Al Schmidt also testified that his office checked out all claims, no matter how insane, and found nothing. He described the intense level of threats following Trump's malicious accusations via Twitter. The threats became more "specific" and "graphic."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on June 13, 2022, 02:37:22 PM
Quote from: Yabetz on June 13, 2022, 01:58:31 PM
None of the politicians were ever really in danger

Its quite clear they were in very real danger. And everything that has been learned since that day has confirmed that.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on June 13, 2022, 03:24:23 PM
Quote from: Yabetz on June 13, 2022, 12:24:31 PM
What's your source for that? The only ones armed were the Capitol police.What, the Mueller report?Why did the DNC refuse to allow the FBI or DHS to examine the servers? AFAIK the only ones who examined them were the DNC-employed CrowdStrike.I don't watch any cable news.

Whatever your source of news may be, it's obviously full of Trump supporting BS, because that's all your post is.

I'm putting you on Ignore, and I suggest everyone else here does.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on June 13, 2022, 03:33:42 PM
Quote from: Yabetz on June 13, 2022, 01:58:31 PM
And what percent of Democrats believe Hillary actually won in 2016?

Quick Googling didn't give an answer to that. I'd say hardly anyone.

Quote from: Yabetz on June 13, 2022, 01:58:31 PMAnd again a lot of Americans were frustrated with the appearance of voting irregularities in 2020.

There were about 60 court cases about this and they lost them all. Even Trump appointed judges said there is no evidence.

Quote from: Yabetz on June 13, 2022, 01:58:31 PMThey didn't burn down the Capitol.

Nobody says they did.

Quote from: Yabetz on June 13, 2022, 01:58:31 PMNone of the politicians were ever really in danger, all the "democracy in peril" hyperpartisan hyperbolic b.s. aside.

They were in danger. Only a moron says otherwise.

Quote from: Yabetz on June 13, 2022, 01:58:31 PMYeah it was stupid, but it wasn't an insurrection any more than antifa taking over a chunk of Seattle was. And also even now we have groups attempting to shut down the Supreme Court by besieging the building, with no cries of insurrection.≈

Whatever. I am a Finn. Why do I care? Americans must sort these things out themselves...

Quote from: Yabetz on June 13, 2022, 01:58:31 PMAll this -- the reactions here -- demonstrates exactly why classical liberalism is dead. Forget gerrymandering and "misinformation". Political agendas become religion. Dissenters are demonic heretics who should just shut up and disappear. It isn't possible to disagree respectfully. You've got to smash someone's face in.

I am too tired to decode this tirade... i don't even follow US politics anymore that much.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 13, 2022, 03:35:17 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on June 13, 2022, 02:37:22 PM
Its quite clear they were in very real danger. And everything that has been learned since that day has confirmed that.



Meseems you are addressing someone who is wilfully impervious to fact.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 13, 2022, 03:35:59 PM
Quote from: JBS on June 13, 2022, 03:24:23 PM
Whatever your source of news may be, it's obviously full of Trump supporting BS, because that's all your post is.

I'm putting you on Ignore, and I suggest everyone else here does.



I'm one step ahead of you.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 13, 2022, 06:13:05 PM
Jennifer Rubin:

Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.) declared, "We have to learn the lesson 'why did we lose in 2020?' It was the comportment and the temperament." He also agreed with the suggestion that Trump was guilty of "dereliction of duty." Bacon went further, saying he would not dismiss out of hand a criminal indictment of Trump. Despite these views, Bacon won more than 80 percent of the vote in his primary contest last month.

It is not hard for Republicans to admit the obvious, to stop pandering to the deluded MAGA base and to acknowledge that Trump betrayed his oath. Yet the timorous McCarthy (not to mention the ridiculously ambitious crew of 2024 contenders) cannot manage even that.

All praise is due to Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.), who has already earned her place in history. But amid the admiration and praise for her, the question remains: Why is the rest of her party so cowardly?


deluded MAGA base ... whereof there is no lack of evidence here.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 13, 2022, 07:11:53 PM
And we saw some of this blather today, as well:

Department of Whataboutery (https://morningshots.thebulwark.com/p/department-of-whataboutery?s=r)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on June 13, 2022, 09:11:33 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 13, 2022, 06:13:05 PM
Jennifer Rubin:

Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.) declared, "We have to learn the lesson 'why did we lose in 2020?' It was the comportment and the temperament." He also agreed with the suggestion that Trump was guilty of "dereliction of duty." Bacon went further, saying he would not dismiss out of hand a criminal indictment of Trump. Despite these views, Bacon won more than 80 percent of the vote in his primary contest last month.

It is not hard for Republicans to admit the obvious, to stop pandering to the deluded MAGA base and to acknowledge that Trump betrayed his oath. Yet the timorous McCarthy (not to mention the ridiculously ambitious crew of 2024 contenders) cannot manage even that.

All praise is due to Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.), who has already earned her place in history. But amid the admiration and praise for her, the question remains: Why is the rest of her party so cowardly?


deluded MAGA base ... whereof there is no lack of evidence here.
It is interesting isn't it. A non-American friend was asking me about this compared to Nixon. With Nixon, his own party came to him and told him he was done. Conformist bias among republicans has taken this rot to a cancer on the party. How can we function without two reasonable parties (at least)? How can democracy? Republicans are very lucky in a way. What if they had broken all the way in and actually got their hands on a congress-person? Republicans dodged a bullet (or a beating/hanging). They can say it's all nothing while crossing their fingers behind their backs. It's cowardly. They must know that, but for luck, they could be in a position of being banished and branded as the party that ate itself by encouraging a mob to really hurt someone.
In a way trumpf was pretty surprising. In another way, he followed the book while all-the-while winking as if it could all just be a big joke. If he doesn't make a come-back then I think the narrative led by a very brave Cheney will stick. If he does come back...

As an aside, I might have mentioned that my family lost my sibling to this cult. It's her that it cut us off, including parents, just because we'd rather not discuss it. She refuses to even agree to disagree. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 14, 2022, 05:36:22 AM
Eugene Robinson:

One of two things has to be true. Trump completely lost touch with reality. Or he decided to lie in an attempt to cling to power.

The committee has already made a powerful case for that second scenario.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 14, 2022, 05:44:09 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 14, 2022, 05:36:22 AM
Eugene Robinson:

One of two things has to be true. Trump completely lost touch with reality. Or he decided to lie in an attempt to cling to power.

The committee has already made a powerful case for that second scenario.


The House select committee might not be able to reach the Trumpists who appear to regard being grifted by their leader as a mark of honor. But sane Americans will see what bad business this is for the country.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 14, 2022, 08:42:48 AM
And because, shamefully, in America we do need to state the obvious:

Of Course Trump Is Responsible for His Lies (https://www.thebulwark.com/did-trump-know-he-was-lying-who-cares-fox-january-6/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on June 14, 2022, 02:05:02 PM
Quote from: Yabetz on June 13, 2022, 12:10:14 PM
Great, now let's talk about who funded the now-discredited Steele dossier. There is zero evidence that anything the Russians might have done in 2016 changed one vote. Mueller didn't even know what was in his report. Plus, no one was charged with anything other than process crimes. I'm certainly no big Trump fan, but I've had quite enough of MSM/DNC outright lies.No there wasn't. It was a bunch of unarmed yahoos who thought they were being snookered by a rigged election. The summer before that we had entire city blocks being looted and burned.

You claimed that democrats keep asserting that Russian disinformation turned the 2016 election. Could you please name and quote any prominent democrats who did this? I've always said it's impossible to ascertain with certainty whether or not such disinformation had a critical influence, but given the tiny margin of victory, 70,000 votes over several states, such an assertion is far from implausible. Had you read the Mueller Report and done other minimal research, you would be aware that Russian "influencers" had established false identities as US citizens for more than a year in advance on numerous fora to establish trust and familiarity with other users. One should at least understand what the Russians did before making blanket assertions about its influence.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 14, 2022, 05:09:02 PM
More bad news for the Trump crime family.

Trump Denied Final Appeal, Must Sit For NY AG's Deposition in Trump Org Investigation (https://hillreporter.com/trump-denied-final-appeal-must-sit-for-ny-ags-deposition-in-trump-org-investigation-133512)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on June 14, 2022, 07:04:27 PM
What exactly would be the motivation for Russians to vote for Trump? (assuming it's the Russian government)
Especially since Putin didn't try to take Ukraine when Trump was president... seems like Putin/Russian government couldn't get their way with Trump in power, so why would they want him in power?
What is the connection I'm missing here? Were bribes or something part of it?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on June 14, 2022, 07:37:15 PM
Trump was openly hostile to Nato, and openly admired Putin. Plus there's the Trump business dealings in Russia which connect to various oligarchs and mafiosos in Russia. We still have no idea of how indebted Trump might be to Russia.

It's also relevant that the "perfect phone call" for which Trump was first impeached was an attempt to extort Ukraine.

Had it not been for Trump's utter mishandling of Covid, he probably would have been re-elected. So through 2019 Putin would have been justified to base his calculations on Trump being in office through 2024, and not feel a rush to finish off Ukraine.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on June 15, 2022, 09:23:27 AM
Quote from: JBS on June 14, 2022, 07:37:15 PM
Trump was openly hostile to Nato, and openly admired Putin.
Sure, but I don't get how that leads to this:
Quote"I know Vladimir Putin very well and he would have never done what he is doing now during the Trump Administration, no way!"
https://www.dailysabah.com/world/americas/no-way-trump-says-russia-didnt-invade-ukraine-on-his-watch

Wouldn't Russia have gotten the idea of the US letting Russia invade Ukraine be naturally a part of the deal?



Quote from: JBS on June 14, 2022, 07:37:15 PM
Had it not been for Trump's utter mishandling of Covid, he probably would have been re-elected.
Maybe so.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on June 15, 2022, 11:33:28 AM
Quote from: greg on June 15, 2022, 09:23:27 AM
Sure, but I don't get how that leads to this:https://www.dailysabah.com/world/americas/no-way-trump-says-russia-didnt-invade-ukraine-on-his-watch

Wouldn't Russia have gotten the idea of the US letting Russia invade Ukraine be naturally a part of the deal?


You seem to forget that Trump says whatever he thinks his target audience would like to hear, and if that resembles the truth, it's pure accident.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on June 15, 2022, 05:46:31 PM
Quote from: JBS on June 15, 2022, 11:33:28 AM
You seem to forget that Trump says whatever he thinks his target audience would like to hear, and if that resembles the truth, it's pure accident.
Yeah, but that line of thinking is heading towards such cynical distrust that it's just a pure dead end. Just because he tells people what they want to hear (isn't that quite typical of politicians, it's kind of their job?) doesn't mean that's the only explanation. Of course, he'll always proudly announce the positive things and try to either spin the negatives as positives, or ignore/whataboutism the negatives.

Let's say he had some shady dealings with Russia. It could be that, due to a lifetime as a businessman, he knows how to make and keep a deal. And Russia starting a war was breaking a deal. (Remember how he leaned more anti-war than a typical US president). (it could have been "elect me as president and i'll do this and this for you, but don't attack Ukraine or the deal is off," etc.)

That possibility is an actual positive, amidst the negatives. Just a suspicion, but people should consider this, and I don't think they do because I've never heard anyone mention this as a possibility because they are only interested in the negative aspects and behaviors regarding Trump.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on June 15, 2022, 06:19:14 PM
Trump specializes in breaking deals, not keeping them.

If there was such an arrangement, it would undoubtedly be more on the lines of Trump forcing Ukraine to surrender before any shots were fired. He would have nothing to personally gain by helping Ukraine resist Russia.

But Trump's statement is merely typical Trumpian bluster.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: LKB on June 15, 2022, 06:38:01 PM
Quote from: JBS on June 15, 2022, 06:19:14 PM
Trump specializes in breaking deals, not keeping them.

If there was such an arrangement, it would undoubtedly be more on the lines of Trump forcing Ukraine to surrender before any shots were fired. He would have nothing to personally gain by helping Ukraine resist Russia.

But Trump's statement is merely typical Trumpian bluster.

Trump was unique among recent US Presidents in that he brought no useful attributes to the office whatsoever. Unfortunately, that little factoid probably won't  keep the profoundly disgraced Republican Party from nominating him anyway, since they  are more interested in securing Trump's idiot base than they are in assuring the continuance of American democracy.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on June 15, 2022, 07:18:43 PM
Quote from: LKB on June 15, 2022, 06:38:01 PM
Trump was unique among recent US Presidents in that he brought no useful attributes to the office whatsoever. Unfortunately, that little factoid probably won't  keep the profoundly disgraced Republican Party from nominating him anyway, since they  are more interested in securing Trump's idiot base than they are in assuring the continuance of American democracy.

Trump's base has always been their base. That's why they can't get rid of him.

I am, in the rarified intellectual sense, a socially conservative person bending to libertarianism.

I was prone to mingle online in conservative spaces, and often would see various RW posters denounce the apparent allegiance of minorities to the Democratic party. I would challenge them: our immigration system is screwed up, Blacks do suffer from systemic racism; the GOP needs to offer solutions to those problems.

The response was almost always along the lines of "they're trained to ignore conservative ideas". That is, the racist/xenophobic idea that Blacks and immigrants inherently gravitate to progressive ideas, no matter how bad they are.  They would freely admit that thet opposed immigration because they assumed they would vote Democratic

So they feel their political needs require suppressing blacks and minorities.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: vandermolen on June 16, 2022, 12:31:57 AM
Quote from: LKB on June 15, 2022, 06:38:01 PM
Trump was unique among recent US Presidents in that he brought no useful attributes to the office whatsoever. Unfortunately, that little factoid probably won't  keep the profoundly disgraced Republican Party from nominating him anyway, since they  are more interested in securing Trump's idiot base than they are in assuring the continuance of American democracy.
Although I'm an outsider I very much agree with what you say - all v depressing and not much better here.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on June 16, 2022, 05:56:07 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on June 16, 2022, 12:31:57 AM
Although I'm an outsider I very much agree with what you say - all v depressing and not much better here.
His one unique attribute was giving the impression that it was impossible to feel talked down to by him. It's something I guess. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 16, 2022, 10:23:39 AM
Another nail in the coffin of the recent whataboutery: Eastman admitted to Pence team that Gore didn't use argument Trump was pushing
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on June 16, 2022, 08:35:53 PM
https://www.pressherald.com/2022/06/15/daponte-string-quartet-rehired-board-members-replaced/

DaPonte String Quartet rehired, and board members replaced

"The DaPonte String Quartet lives...

A little more than a month after the Midcoast-based classical musicians received letters of termination from the head of its nonprofit friends' group, a new board of directors has been established and has rehired the four members...

Frank would not provide additional details about how the resolution was reached but said the former board members who had pushed to terminate the musicians agreed to step down, as did the executive director, Erica Ball. Frank also declined to share any documentation of the agreement."

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on June 17, 2022, 10:07:20 PM
Quote from: JBS on June 15, 2022, 07:18:43 PM
That is, the racist/xenophobic idea that Blacks and immigrants inherently gravitate to progressive ideas, no matter how bad they are.
Wouldn't it be that they have it backwards? And also incorrect in the fact that blacks an immigrants don't inherently gravitate to progressive ideas, but rather they vote democrat because democrats advertise themselves as friendly towards them.

Blacks and immigrants are both more socially conservative on average than whites, and progressive ideas fall largely in the social realm (although in the economic realm it might be a completely different story, that part might be closer to being correct?).

But specifically, it gets tangled right there. It's another aspect of how two parties can't represent the various cultures/subcultures' values completely.

The question conservatives raise is, have democrats in charge of big cities really pulled the black population out of poverty in the last 50+ years? Are they really the best option?

I don't know the answer to that. But it raises the question, just because that party advertises itself as friendly to that demographic, is it really going to be the best option? Or are both options bad, and it's hopeless?





Quote from: JBS on June 15, 2022, 06:19:14 PM
Trump specializes in breaking deals, not keeping them.
Is that how businessmen become successful?  ???


Quote from: JBS on June 15, 2022, 06:19:14 PM
He would have nothing to personally gain by helping Ukraine resist Russia.
I know he is quite narcissistic, but there is really no possibility he just doesn't like war?

And now that I think of it, you could still frame that as possible narcissism STILL- "if a war breaks out under my presidency, i might not get re-elected and will be only a one-term president."

So yeah, he probably would have had something to gain.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on June 18, 2022, 04:40:24 AM
Quote from: JBS on June 15, 2022, 06:19:14 PM
Trump specializes in breaking deals, not keeping them.

If there was such an arrangement, it would undoubtedly be more on the lines of Trump forcing Ukraine to surrender before any shots were fired. He would have nothing to personally gain by helping Ukraine resist Russia.

But Trump's statement is merely typical Trumpian bluster.

I think Trump and Putin have a similar idea about deals:  deals are like pie crusts ...

If anything, Trump antagonism towards NATO encouraged Putin to believe that it was weak, and that Western response to an invasion would be like 2014, i.e.  Tsk, tsk and a few more ineffectual sanctions.  That plus Putin's believe in the reliance of central and western Europe on Russian oil & gas combined with high fuel prices, occasioned Putin's decision to invade.  Further, apparently Putin also mistakenly believed that the Ukraine government was much weaker and more unpopular than it was -- ignoring the popularity and resolve of President Zelenskyy.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on June 18, 2022, 06:37:17 AM
Quote from: greg on June 17, 2022, 10:07:20 PM

Is that how businessmen become successful?  ???
Trump, when judged by the usual standards (not declaring multiple bankruptcy, etc), was an astonishingly *un*successful businessman. His achievements more properly lie in being a con artist and grifter.
Quote
I know he is quite narcissistic, but there is really no possibility he just doesn't like war?

And now that I think of it, you could still frame that as possible narcissism STILL- "if a war breaks out under my presidency, i might not get re-elected and will be only a one-term president."

So yeah, he probably would have had something to gain.

May I point out that Covid19 broke out, and his narcissism wouldn't let him deal with that.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 20, 2022, 07:04:47 AM
Headline of the Day: Be careful about lionizing Jan. 6 witnesses. They failed to stop the insurrection.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: LKB on June 20, 2022, 10:10:17 AM
Another example of what some in the GOP apparently find acceptable: encouraging the murder of fellow Republicans with differing points of view.

https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article262692472.html

( After further investigation, l've found it necessary to modify my opening comment. It seems the candidate in question is at least somewhat controversial within the GOP, and in fact does not enjoy universal support. LKB )
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 20, 2022, 10:13:58 AM
Quote from: LKB on June 20, 2022, 10:10:17 AM
Another example of what today's GOP apparently finds acceptable: encouraging the murder of fellow Republicans with differing points of view.

https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article262692472.html (https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article262692472.html)

Oh, but ya gotta kill the Reoublicans who ain't REAL Republicans ... and only Trump supporters iz REAL Republicans!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 20, 2022, 11:55:18 AM
.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 21, 2022, 01:33:38 PM
Bowers also relayed what he thought might be a gaffe from Giuliani, that "we've got lots of theories; we just don't have the evidence." If ever Trump's team made a confession of bad faith, this would be it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on June 21, 2022, 01:50:02 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 20, 2022, 11:55:18 AM
.

Outshoring of blue collar jobs, decreasing white population, and immigration probably cast a threat to some white people and activated white supremacy. When I was in Hawaii, a few (white) people told me that only few whites would like to live in Hawaii since some white people are not comfortable with a non-majority status. I don't know if it's true or not, but I remember the statement. Some researchers say that without affirming or rejecting it, the public and media should hear the complaints by formal and latent white supremacists and have open discussions with them. It may be a good idea as many whites today think that they are stolen by the government, attacked by media, and discriminated against.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 21, 2022, 02:02:11 PM
Quote from: LKB on June 20, 2022, 10:10:17 AM
Another example of what some in the GOP apparently find acceptable: encouraging the murder of fellow Republicans with differing points of view.

https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article262692472.html (https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article262692472.html)

( After further investigation, l've found it necessary to modify my opening comment. It seems the candidate in question is at least somewhat controversial within the GOP, and in fact does not enjoy universal support. LKB )

Charlie Sykes: Essentially, Greitens is weaponizing his own immorality.

And it may work. Writes Allahpundit: "That's the sort of depravity to which nihilistic "own the libs" thinking leads some voters, and there may be enough of them in Missouri to win a Senate primary."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on June 21, 2022, 02:54:18 PM
Justice Sotomayor continues her warnings of a dramatic conservative turn at the Supreme Court: CNN.


https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/21/politics/sonia-sotomayor-conservative-supreme-court/index.html
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on June 23, 2022, 09:09:11 AM
If anyone needs to atone for some horrible sin and is seeking an appropriate form of self-flagellation, might I suggest listening to Trump's full hour-long call to the GA Secretary of State and his office's lawyer? How could this criminal clown not be convicted of election tampering after this series of lies and threats?:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-3VysGZA1M
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on June 23, 2022, 09:17:10 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on June 23, 2022, 09:09:11 AM
If anyone needs to atone for some horrible sin and is seeking an appropriate form of self-flagellation, might I suggest listening to Trump's full hour-long call to the GA Secretary of State and his office's lawyer? How could this criminal clown not be convicted of election tampering after this series of lies and threats?:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-3VysGZA1M
It really feels like democracy is sort of over in America. Or, at least, bent to almost breaking. There are so many problems for the world to face and I'm really scared of its survival with this vacuum in leadership. (Trump) Republicans are just crackpots. Trump barely cobbled together a bunch who barely even knew enough to run a government.
I guess if I believed (like Todd) that this was the best argument for him...
Imagine the best argument for a candidate is that he's totally inept and only total morons are willing to stand next to him on a podium. Yikes.
And what about Dems? Yeah, I wonder. Does anybody think Biden can win again? Anybody? Harris? Seriously. Who's a serious candidate for Dems? Welcome The 27th POT(un)US Desantis?   
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on June 24, 2022, 03:27:16 AM
Quote from: milk on June 23, 2022, 09:17:10 PM
It really feels like democracy is sort of over in America. Or, at least, bent to almost breaking. There are so many problems for the world to face and I'm really scared of its survival with this vacuum in leadership. (Trump) Republicans are just crackpots. Trump barely cobbled together a bunch who barely even knew enough to run a government.
I guess if I believed (like Todd) that this was the best argument for him...
Imagine the best argument for a candidate is that he's totally inept and only total morons are willing to stand next to him on a podium. Yikes.
And what about Dems? Yeah, I wonder. Does anybody think Biden can win again? Anybody? Harris? Seriously. Who's a serious candidate for Dems? Welcome The 27th POT(un)US Desantis?

The necessary growth of the power of federal government power has undermined the "republican" (small 'R') concept of the "founding fathers" -- i.e. a federation of sovereign states.  Remember that the states were direct extrapolations of the pre-existing British colonies that had been separately created and had been very substantially self-governed.

Democracy as it is conceived in the contemporary world, is irrelevant to the US Federal government.  In several respects the states control the Federal government and the electoral process to the direct detriment of democracy:
All of the above State powers are under partisan control.  The rigid bi-partisanship of the USA is the result, more than the cause, of the need to control these powers.

That original "republican" concept was never democratic but, more to the point, today is no longer viable. Disfunction is the inevitable result.  However it is nowadays impossible in practical terms to change the Constitution  so the USA is in deep trouble.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Johnnie Burgess on June 24, 2022, 03:31:13 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on June 24, 2022, 03:27:16 AM
The necessary growth of the power of federal government power has undermined the "republican" (small 'R') concept of the "founding fathers" -- i.e. a federation of sovereign states.  Remember that the states were direct extrapolations of the pre-existing British colonies that had been separately created and had been very substantially self-governed.

Democracy as it is conceived in the contemporary world, is irrelevant to the US Federal government.  In several respects the states control the Federal government and the electoral process to the direct detriment of democracy:

  • The Senate, the senior chamber, has two Senators per state, thus Wyoming has the same representation as California with 65X the population
  • The Electoral College system allows states to define key aspects, thus in 48/50 states the "winner takes all" College seats however close the popular vote
  • State committees define the Federal electoral districts thus encouraging "gerrymandering"
  • States control Federal voter registration
  • States control the on-the-ground voting processes.
All of the above State powers are under partisan control.  The rigid bi-partisanship of the USA is the result, more than the cause, of the need to control these powers.

That original "republican" concept was never democratic but, more to the point, today is no longer viable.  However it is nowadays impossible in practical terms to change the Constitution.

The point was not to let 1 or 2 states pick the President.  Democrats would love it if we allowed California on New York do that.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on June 24, 2022, 06:15:50 AM
Quote from: Johnnie Burgess on June 24, 2022, 03:31:13 AM
The point was not to let 1 or 2 states pick the President.  Democrats would love it if we allowed California on New York do that.

... Uhmm ... actually it's about letting the people pick the President regardless of which State they live in.

And in any event, choice of President is one thing and control of Congress another.

As it stands according to the US Constitution, states have two sources of power:

I'm saying the latter powers are dysfunctional given  the realities of current society, economy, and the international situation, whatever those circumstance may have been in 1792.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on June 24, 2022, 06:24:45 AM
Quote from: Johnnie Burgess on June 24, 2022, 03:31:13 AM
The point was not to let 1 or 2 states pick the President.  Democrats would love it if we allowed California on New York do that.

Why should "states" pick the President? Why not the people regardless of in which state they live in? Of course bigger states should have more say because they are bigger. Popular vote should matter and if popular votes are against Republicans then maybe Republicans should re-think their political agenda to get more votes in blue states. Biden got about 7 million (!) votes more than Trump. Of course he should be the president in democracy.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on June 24, 2022, 06:38:43 AM
Quote from: Dry Brett Kavanaugh on June 21, 2022, 02:54:18 PM
Justice Sotomayor continues her warnings of a dramatic conservative turn at the Supreme Court: CNN.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/21/politics/sonia-sotomayor-conservative-supreme-court/index.html

An obvious and egregious example of the looming trend is the SCOTUS decision to overturn a New York laws restriction the carrying of firearms outside the home ... see Reuters: U.S. Supreme Court expands gun rights, strikes down New York law (https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/us-supreme-court-strikes-down-new-york-limits-concealed-handguns-2022-06-23/)

Basically it's crazy.

The only rational the 2nd Amendment provides for the right to bear arms is "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State ..."  Yet in 2008 the Court decided that the 2nd granted the right for personal protection -- a totally gratuitous interpretation, (coming Court members who claimed to be strict constructionist or textualists but who were actually hypocrite conservatives).

What next?  Will the SCOTUS some time soon decide that 2nd grants the right for citizens to arm against "oppressive governments"?  That would be the next ridiculously consistent extension of the meaning of the 2nd.  It would be an enormity, because the explicit purpose of the 2nd was to provide for a "well regulated Militia".  So I draw you attention to Article I, Section 8, C15.1:  "The Congress shall have Power . . .  To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions; . . .". {emphasis add}.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on June 24, 2022, 07:02:36 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on June 24, 2022, 06:24:45 AM
Why should "states" pick the President? Why not the people regardless of in which state they live in? Of course bigger states should have more say because they are bigger. Popular vote should matter and if popular votes are against Republicans then maybe Republicans should re-think their political agenda to get more votes in blue states. Biden got about 7 million (!) votes more than Trump. Of course he should be the president in democracy.

Well yeah, as you and I outsiders see it that as democratic that it ought to be one-person-one vote for the POTUS.  But that was far from way the "founding fathers" saw it in the late 1780s.

And the reason the FFs saw it as they did is, maybe ironically, a hangover from the colonial era.  We should understand that the 13 colonies were all founded separately with separate charters and separate colonial assemblies.  Though the details differed, each colony was largely self-governing in all local matters.  In fact the colonies resented it when the British Parliament finally decided to exert a little "central" imperial control by collecting some new taxes;  (never mind that that Parliament wanted the taxes to pay for the defense of the colonies against the French in the Seven Years' War, a.k.a. French & Indian War).  This resentment against the new Parliamentary initiative was the impetus for the war of independence, (sometimes imprecisely called the "American Revolution").

When that war was won, (with the indispensable support of France), the power-that-were, (i.e. wealthy local elites), within the colonies cum states were unwilling give up the prerogatives they enjoyed under the largely unregulated colonial system to a new, United States federal government.  That's the reason the US Constitution is the way it is.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on June 24, 2022, 07:18:53 AM
Roe v. Wade has been overturned.  Funny enough just yesterday I read an article that Americans had only a 25% approval rating for the Supreme Court, an all time low.  I think life time appointments don't make any sense because they are partisan hacks just like everyone else.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on June 24, 2022, 08:53:49 AM
Quote from: DavidW on June 24, 2022, 07:18:53 AM
Roe v. Wade has been overturned.  Funny enough just yesterday I read an article that Americans had only a 25% approval rating for the Supreme Court, an all time low.  I think life time appointments don't make any sense because they are partisan hacks just like everyone else.

Just imagine if Hillary Clinton had won in 2016. Elections have consequences. People were warned, but they didn't listen. Now Americans will learn the hard way that rights are not to taken for granted. Soon the only right Americans have is the 2nd amendment...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 24, 2022, 04:58:41 PM
Eugene Robinson: I have to be consistent, and I believe Biden definitely runs only if Trump runs, and I said last week I thought Trump would pretend to run but not actually go through with it. With Trump on the sidelines, I think Biden decides that his mission — protecting the nation from four more years of Trump — is accomplished. Given the state of the world, what sane person (especially at his age) would want a second term of abuse and ingratitude?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on June 25, 2022, 03:03:07 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on June 24, 2022, 08:53:49 AM
Just imagine if Hillary Clinton had won in 2016. Elections have consequences. People were warned, but they didn't listen. Now Americans will learn the hard way that rights are not to taken for granted. Soon the only right Americans have is the 2nd amendment...

I gather that is about right.  The SCOTUS is saying that id a citizen/human right isn't very explicitly detailed in the Constitution, mainly Amendments 1-10, then only the States may define that right if they choose to do so;  (of course gun rights defined in the 2nd, albeit the Court has choose to expand the definition, notably in 2008).

Roe v. Wade is only the first of likely Court decisions based on this very restricted view of the authority of the Federal Constitution.

"States rights" have been used as excuse for a lot stupid shit including slave -- holy crap,  :o could there be and overturn of the 13th and/or 14th or 15th Amendments?  Well thank goodness probably not because, at least, they are duly passed Amendments.  :-X
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 25, 2022, 07:29:11 AM
Amanda Carpenter: In late 2020, Donald Trump instructed a top Justice Department official to "Just say [the election] was corrupt and leave the rest to me and the Republican congressmen."

Trump gave this command on Dec. 27, 2020—nearly eight weeks after Election Day and almost two weeks after the Electoral College met and confirmed Joe Biden's victory—to then-Acting Deputy Attorney General Richard Donoghue, who revealed it in testimony before the House January 6th Committee yesterday. The revelation, confirmed in Donoghue's contemporaneous notes, shows just how serious the former president was about overturning the election.

With that simple order, Trump's plot becomes clear. He wanted Department of Justice (DOJ) officials to lie about the election, creating a pretense that Republican members of Congress could use to reject Electoral College votes for Biden.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 25, 2022, 08:52:00 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 25, 2022, 07:29:11 AM
Amanda Carpenter: In late 2020, Donald Trump instructed a top Justice Department official to "Just say [the election] was corrupt and leave the rest to me and the Republican congressmen."

Trump gave this command on Dec. 27, 2020—nearly eight weeks after Election Day and almost two weeks after the Electoral College met and confirmed Joe Biden's victory—to then-Acting Deputy Attorney General Richard Donoghue, who revealed it in testimony before the House January 6th Committee yesterday. The revelation, confirmed in Donoghue's contemporaneous notes, shows just how serious the former president was about overturning the election.

With that simple order, Trump's plot becomes clear. He wanted Department of Justice (DOJ) officials to lie about the election, creating a pretense that Republican members of Congress could use to reject Electoral College votes for Biden.


The whole article is worth the read:

The Republicans Who Wanted Pardons for Their Trump Coup Actions (https://www.thebulwark.com/the-republicans-who-wanted-pardons-for-their-trump-coup-actions/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on June 25, 2022, 09:25:01 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on June 24, 2022, 06:38:43 AM

The only rational the 2nd Amendment provides for the right to bear arms is "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State ..." 

Given that ICBMs, SAMs, and tanks, to cite just a few examples, are currently deemed "necessary to the security of a free State," I believe a narrow, originalist reading of the 2nd amendment would hold that US citizens should now be allowed, if not required, to keep tactical nuclear weapons in their garages and to know how to drive tanks. It's clearly what the founding fathers envisioned.

Quote from: Yabetz on June 25, 2022, 08:08:08 AM
So, similar to approval for Biden, Congress and the mainstream media. I've also read that only about 5% of the public thinks abortion is a top issue. The Democrats made a mistake in making a sacrament of it. The Democrat base has gone from "safe, legal and rare" to abortion-on-demand up until the moment of birth. That isn't where most people are. That also isn't where these European countries continually held up as sociopolitical paragons are either. France's abortion laws are stricter than Mississippi's, as has often been pointed out over the past couple of days.

Bullshit


Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on June 25, 2022, 11:35:46 AM
Quote from: Yabetz on June 25, 2022, 08:08:08 AM
So, similar to approval for Biden, Congress and the mainstream media. I've also read that only about 5% of the public thinks abortion is a top issue. The Democrats made a mistake in making a sacrament of it. The Democrat base has gone from "safe, legal and rare" to abortion-on-demand up until the moment of birth. That isn't where most people are. That also isn't where these European countries continually held up as sociopolitical paragons are either. France's abortion laws are stricter than Mississippi's, as has often been pointed out over the past couple of days.

There are extremists on both side of the abortion argument.  On one side, no abortion under essentially any circumstance;  on the other side, unrestricted abortion up 'till full-term birth.  But I don't thing all Democrats can be associate with the latter, any more than all Republicans can be associated with the former.

It seems you are make the fallacious "slippery slope" argument apparently against the Democrats.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on June 25, 2022, 11:44:30 AM
Quote from: Yabetz on June 25, 2022, 11:38:35 AM
I didn't say all. I said the Dem *base*, which has shifted much farther to the left than the Republican base has shifted right. I think both parties are the Uniparty anyway. Not really all that much difference between the establishments.

Don't waste your time with this troll.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on June 25, 2022, 11:57:19 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on June 25, 2022, 09:25:01 AM
Given that ICBMs, SAMs, and tanks, to cite just a few examples, are currently deemed "necessary to the security of a free State," I believe a narrow, originalist reading of the 2nd amendment would hold that US citizens should now be allowed, if not required, to keep tactical nuclear weapons in their garages and to know how to drive tanks. It's clearly what the founding fathers envisioned.

But the 2nd provide only one rationale for the "right to bear arms", that being the need for a "well-regulated militia".  Nor did it say anything about a requirement to bear arms

At the time, 1792, the US army was very small and both external and internal threats were easy to imagine.  American military capacity, such as it was, was effectively provided by State Militias.  There are no State militias today;  effectively they are replaced by the National Guard, (which provides its members with whatever arms they need).  When you get down to it, the 2nd Amendment is obsolete.  A responsible SCOTUS would recognize that fact.

Yes, that's the very same National Guard that President Trump ought to have called our hours early to control the January 6h putative insurrection.  In fact VP Pence authorized its use as I recall: Trump never did.

In actuality the 2nd Amendment neither says nor implies anything about arms for personal self-defense, nor does it suggest anything about allowing citizens arms to resist oppressive government.  The latter is a farcical notion given the the Constitution allow Congress all up the militia to suppress insurrection.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 25, 2022, 12:28:20 PM
Dana Milbank:

At one point, Trump complained to top DOJ officials: "You guys may not be following the internet the way I do."

He was right. Only a crackpot would do that.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 25, 2022, 12:32:14 PM
Quote from: Daverz on June 25, 2022, 11:44:30 AM
Don't waste your time with this troll.

No, indeed.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on June 25, 2022, 02:28:44 PM
I suspect that yesterday might have something to do with big corporations and their future outlook...

although big corporations profited from Covid while small businesses (potential future competition) shut down, we have a below replacement birth rate, in large part due to the unsustainable cost of having kids.

That means that won't be a satisfactory amount of low wage workers joining the workforce in 20 years, for these large corporations.

So one strategy might be to make abortion illegal in the hopes that the birth rate will increase. I doubt the decision is based on moral opinion, more likely money and power, as it always is.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on June 25, 2022, 03:36:41 PM
Quote from: Yabetz on June 25, 2022, 12:02:34 PM
Genuine, sincere question here: how are the events of 1/6/21 any more an insurrection than the calls we hear now to disregard rulings from the Supreme Court, or even abolishing the Court altogether? I might've missed it, but I haven't heard one Democratic politician come forward and say "I disagree with the decision, but we're a nation of laws and so we have to leave it at that." It's always "my side lost and so now we have to throw the board off the table and change the rules." It goes back to the death of classical liberalism I mentioned.

Seriously?  Have any of the protesters broken into the Supreme Court building, smashed things, and directly threatened the Justices with death?  Have any police been beaten or killed?  Yeah, maybe betimes there is a fine lines between protest and insurrection but the mob of January 6th crossed that line.

Were I an American, I wouldn't be calling for the abolition of the Supreme Court, but I would be calling for the restoration of its independence and impartiality.  Presently it is a political creature of President and the Senator majority.  At the very least Justices' term should limited, say, to 16 years.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on June 25, 2022, 06:02:12 PM
Quote from: Yabetz on June 25, 2022, 08:08:08 AM
abortion-on-demand up until the moment of birth.

That is an utter lie. And you're a fool for having swallowed such obvious
and dangerous disinformation so uncritically.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on June 25, 2022, 06:14:37 PM
Quote from: Yabetz on June 25, 2022, 11:36:14 AM

Prove it.

No, troll. It's your assertion, so the burden of proof is yours. Proof you should have sought already.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on June 25, 2022, 06:18:22 PM
NB
The aim of the 1/6 insurrection was to almost literally throw the board off the tables and change the rules.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on June 25, 2022, 07:44:01 PM
And that is in no way "proof" of on demand abortions being done up to the moment of birth. As I'm sure you're aware.

So you're not even trying. You're just trolling.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on June 25, 2022, 09:02:57 PM
Quote from: Yabetz on June 25, 2022, 11:36:14 AM
Prove it.

You're the one who made an assertion about when abortions are performed, so it's you who needs proof.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on June 26, 2022, 03:14:03 AM
Quote from: Yabetz on June 25, 2022, 04:49:08 PM
So as I said you change the rules whenever you lose. That isn't the way it's supposed to work. "Independence and impartiality" simply means "that I find ideologically congenial". I don't recall the SC's independence and impartiality being called into question when it had a more leftward slant. Justices have *always* been nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate. And thus *always* "political creatures". That applied as much to Ruth Bader Ginsburg as it does to Neil Gorsuch.

There I must concede a point to you.  What you are saying is that Supreme Court Justices are, and always have been, political appointments, which is true.

What I'm saying is that the appointment process is, and has always been, a problem.  If the SCOTUS is supposed to be a the third leg of the "checks & balances" more independence ought to be achieved somehow.  Probably there should be stricter qualifications for Justices.  Probably tenure should not be for life but for some extended but fixed term, say 15 or 20 years, so at least the political biases of 30+ years ago, (like Clarence Thomas, 30 years -- or for that matter Ruth Bader Ginsberg, 27 years).

But given the long-standing appointment method, some things still stand out as travesties.  E.g. when Obama nominated Merrick Garland in May '16, the Senate refused to approve on the basis that the nomination ought to be made by the new President to be elected that year.  But when Trump nominated Amy Coney Barrett in October '20, the same Republican hypocrites rushed the nomination through, declaring the it was the President's right & duty to make a nomination at any time in his(her) tenure.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on June 26, 2022, 04:26:07 AM
Quote from: Yabetz on June 25, 2022, 08:08:08 AM
I've also read that only about 5% of the public thinks abortion is a top issue.

I wonder where you read that.

Quoteabortion-on-demand up until the moment of birth.

admirable restraint on your part. Quite recently I heard some crazy talking about abortion after birth.
None of this is obviously real.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on June 26, 2022, 04:47:07 AM
Quote from: Yabetz on June 25, 2022, 06:55:01 PM
What had happened the summer before? No wonder people were cynical about the sudden reverence for law, order and precedent. Again, when Democrats win it's treason to question the results. When Republicans win it's always an act of theft. That's the kind of quasi-religious, disingenuous political hyper-partisanship that I despise.

More bullshit which you will fail to support. You were asked to provide instances of this assertion before and didn't. You're habitually speaking from an alternative orifice.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Johnnie Burgess on June 26, 2022, 05:11:48 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on June 26, 2022, 04:47:07 AM
More bullshit which you will fail to support. You were asked to provide instances of this assertion before and didn't. You're habitually speaking from an alternative orifice.

Hillary spent 4 years crying about losing to Trump.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on June 26, 2022, 07:36:05 AM
Quote from: Yabetz on June 26, 2022, 06:46:23 AM
What do you mean exactly by "independence"? Is Justice Sonia Sotomayor "independent"?

Actually, the lifetime tenure enhances independence of judges. I wouldn't want judges to be mere weathervanes going with this or that ideological drift. But they're going to have political opinions, and I may not agree with them. But just because I disagree with a justice's politics doesn't mean they're not independent. The job of a SC justice is to test the constitutionality of laws, not create them.

Strawman:  I never said the "independence" is defined by a Justice's opinion.  All the Justices have opinions on the Constitution and other issues.  What defines independence in my view is that appointment of Justices is minimally political.  IMHO, it ought to more strongly based on extensive judicial experience and/or high academic achievement is certain aspects of law, and such that the most experienced persons must receive first consideration.

It's true that long tenure is important to assure freedom for outside political persuasion, but 20 years without the possibility of reappointment would be enough.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: fbjim on June 26, 2022, 08:56:53 AM
Of course court appointments are political, however the ideological drift of the court system, effectively exploiting non-democratic aspects of the US political system, and mainstreaming a once-radical idea of "originalism" has been a long-term project that is now bearing fruit for the right wing.

Much like how the right wing attempted to exploit the badly-written Electoral Count Act, this is the sort of thing that erodes government legitimacy. People do not like it when significant rights are removed based on extremely arbitrary factors like who happened to be in charge when certain SC justices passed away.

The reality is that the concept of the Courts as a disinterested entity who only "interprets" the Constitution is out of date because the very idea of interpreting the constitution is now divided on ideological lines. "Originalism" was once a fringe right-wing legal concept and now it is the law of the land.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on June 26, 2022, 11:45:29 AM
Quote from: fbjim on June 26, 2022, 08:56:53 AM
Of course court appointments are political, however the ideological drift of the court system, effectively exploiting non-democratic aspects of the US political system, and mainstreaming a once-radical idea of "originalism" has been a long-term project that is now bearing fruit for the right wing.

Much like how the right wing attempted to exploit the badly-written Electoral Count Act, this is the sort of thing that erodes government legitimacy. People do not like it when significant rights are removed based on extremely arbitrary factors like who happened to be in charge when certain SC justices passed away.

The reality is that the concept of the Courts as a disinterested entity who only "interprets" the Constitution is out of date because the very idea of interpreting the constitution is now divided on ideological lines. "Originalism" was once a fringe right-wing legal concept and now it is the law of the land.

From Wikipedia:
"The original meaning theory, which is closely related to textualism, is the view that interpretation of a written constitution or law should be based on what reasonable persons living at the time of its adoption would have understood the ordinary meaning of the text to be. Antonin Scalia was a proponent of this view, as are Clarence Thomas and Amy Coney Barrett."

Justice Scalia quoted by Wikipedia:
"The theory of originalism treats a constitution like a statute, and gives it the meaning that its words were understood to bear at the time they were promulgated. You will sometimes hear it described as the theory of original intent. You will never hear me refer to original intent, because as I say I am first of all a textualist, and secondly an originalist. If you are a textualist, you don't care about the intent, and I don't care if the framers of the Constitution had some secret meaning in mind when they adopted its words. I take the words as they were promulgated to the people of the United States, and what is the fairly understood meaning of those words."

And yet Scalia, the hypocrite conservative, apparently ignored original meaning when he interpreted the 2nd Amendment to mean that bearing arms mean for personal self-defense rather than just security of the nation.  The best thing about Scalia is that he is dead.  Unfortunately Clarence and Barrett carry on his tradition.

The US Constitution is a very short document and often vague.  It was also written in a very different time and circumstance than what Americans have today.   I have argued many times the Constitution is tragically flawed as it pertains either to the circumstances of the time it was written or, of course, to the circumstance of today.

Given the extreme bi-polarism today, Constitutional change is effectively impossible -- which means that the USA is domed to perpetual dysfunction.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: fbjim on June 26, 2022, 12:09:36 PM
I mean, one of the biggest problems I have with originalism, apart from it being a terrible way to run a country effectively, is that it drapes a veneer of objective disinterest on explicitly politically motivated decisions. It's a disingenuous way to deflect responsibility by saying "Well, hey this is what the document says, don't shoot the messenger".
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on June 26, 2022, 05:05:21 PM
Gotta love the calls for violence on Twitter. That'll surely make things better.  :P

QuoteCarlos Maza
@gaywonk
·
Jun 24
Fascists literally do not care how hard you vote. They are not trying to win elections. Violence is the only language they understand, and it's time we start speaking it.
Carlos Maza
@gaywonk
·
Jun 24
Violence is a legitimate and appropriate response to oppression.
Carlos Maza
@gaywonk
·
Jun 24
The suffragettes planted bombs. Queer people threw bricks. Violence has always been a necessary and important part of social justice.
Carlos Maza
@gaywonk
·
Jun 24
The whole point of democratic governance is to create an alternative to violence.

When the government is no longer democratic, you're supposed to go back to Plan A.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on June 27, 2022, 01:11:18 AM
You are aware, right, that the most significant and massive case of antigovernment violence happened on Jan 6 2021, and those Trump-fans attempt-staging an insurrection were not gay wonks.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on June 27, 2022, 06:28:38 AM
Quote from: Herman on June 27, 2022, 01:11:18 AM
You are aware, right, that the most significant and massive case of antigovernment violence happened on Jan 6 2021, and those Trump-fans attempt-staging an insurrection were not gay wonks.

You are aware,  right,  that you are talking to Greg?  Gay wonks complaining are far more interesting and anti-American than White supremacist Trump supporters looking to hang the VP and Speaker of the House.  They were just rambunctious tourists,  after after all.    ::)

🤠😎
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on June 27, 2022, 08:08:07 AM
Supreme court keeps up their theocratic agenda, by supporting a coach's decision to force his team to pray with him:

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-rules-coach-public-school-prayer-case-rcna31662 (https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-rules-coach-public-school-prayer-case-rcna31662)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 27, 2022, 08:30:10 AM
Quote from: DavidW on June 27, 2022, 08:08:07 AM
Supreme court keeps up their theocratic agenda, by supporting a coach's decision to force his team to pray with him:

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-rules-coach-public-school-prayer-case-rcna31662 (https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-rules-coach-public-school-prayer-case-rcna31662)

Compulsory prayer, just as Jesus taught ....
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Que on June 27, 2022, 10:30:48 AM
Quote from: DavidW on June 27, 2022, 08:08:07 AM
Supreme court keeps up their theocratic agenda, by supporting a coach's decision to force his team to pray with him:

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-rules-coach-public-school-prayer-case-rcna31662 (https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-rules-coach-public-school-prayer-case-rcna31662)

A reactionary minority has taken over the US.... Courtesy of an opportunist named Donald Trump, who has no moral values whatsoever...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on June 27, 2022, 11:03:45 AM
Quote from: Que on June 27, 2022, 10:30:48 AM
A reactionary minority has taken over the US.... Courtesy of an opportunist named Donald Trump, who has no moral values whatsoever...

I know, right?  In the distant future there will doubtless be fantasy tales about the giant group of (they believe) True Believers, totally bamboozled and led astray by one of the least likely candidates for sainthood one is likely to meet. I think the underlying story there has to do with the rot which permeates the belief system, turning into something 180° different from where they began. No one is immune, apparently. :(

8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: André on June 27, 2022, 01:49:50 PM
The SC's decision will likely have the unintended effect of accelerating the so-called browning of America.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 27, 2022, 02:01:43 PM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on June 27, 2022, 11:03:45 AM
I know, right?  In the distant future there will doubtless be fantasy tales about the giant group of (they believe) True Believers, totally bamboozled and led astray by one of the least likely candidates for sainthood one is likely to meet.

Quote from: Frank ZappaThat's right: You asked for it. Remember: there's a big difference between kneeling down and bending over!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on June 27, 2022, 02:41:40 PM
Quote from: André on June 27, 2022, 01:49:50 PM
The SC's decision will likely have the unintended effect of accelerating the so-called browning of America.

Another addition to the list of things that they hadn't quite thought through. ::)

8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on June 27, 2022, 02:42:16 PM
Quote from: Herman on June 27, 2022, 01:11:18 AM
You are aware, right, that the most significant and massive case of antigovernment violence happened on Jan 6 2021, and those Trump-fans attempt-staging an insurrection were not gay wonks.
Oh, ok. So because of Jan.6, it's okay if people burn down the Supreme Court or the Justice's homes. So it's not a problem then.



Quote from: Gurn Blanston on June 27, 2022, 06:28:38 AM
You are aware,  right,  that you are talking to Greg?  Gay wonks complaining are far more interesting and anti-American than White supremacist Trump supporters looking to hang the VP and Speaker of the House.  They were just rambunctious tourists,  after after all.    ::)

🤠😎
Why are bringing up "gay wonk?" I don't think anything about "gay wonk" (i don't even know what a "wonk" is).
More interesting because if it weren't for me, you wouldn't even know about the calls for violence, because the media and websites you visit don't report on it.
In the r/antiwork and r/antinatalism subreddits, also, for example, I've seen plenty of calls for violence in the last two days.
But we'll see.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on June 27, 2022, 02:50:50 PM
Quote from: greg on June 27, 2022, 02:42:16 PM
Oh, ok. So because of Jan.6, it's okay if people burn down the Supreme Court or the Justice's homes. So it's not a problem then.


Why are bringing up "gay wonk?" I don't think anything about "gay wonk" (i don't even know what a "wonk" is).
More interesting because if it weren't for me, you wouldn't even know about the calls for violence, because the media and websites you visit don't report on it.
In the r/antiwork and r/antinatalism subreddits, also, for example, I've seen plenty of calls for violence in the last two days.
But we'll see.

You have no idea what websites I visit, so are in no position to adopt a supercilious attitude with me. I'm also not overly convinced that subreddit muttering is worth the credence you seem to give it, but I may be wrong. That might be where the true evil lurks. Nothing surprises me much any longer.

Let me just say this, it should bother you at a conceptual level to realize that you seem to think that enough Libs can be so congruent on any level that they would get together and commit uncivil disobedience. At a level high enough to actually cause problems? This sounds to me suspiciously like the Great Migrant Caravan that mysteriously disappears the day after every election....   :-\

8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on June 27, 2022, 03:34:48 PM
Quote from: greg on June 27, 2022, 02:42:16 PM
In the r/antiwork and r/antinatalism subreddits, also, for example, I've seen plenty of calls for violence in the last two days.
But we'll see.

I haven't heard of the second subreddit, but the first has a strict no call for violence rule that is a ban-able offense that is strictly enforced by the mods.  And they have NOT been posting calls for violence.  Quit your BS.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on June 27, 2022, 04:44:25 PM
And elected officials on the left aren't calling for violence or amplifying those nutjob voices and would had have denounced calls for violence.

A distinction greg seems not to see.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on June 27, 2022, 08:58:12 PM
The gun and prayer rulings bother me more than the Roe. I really don't know if you can find protection for abortion in the constitution and half the states seem to want it outlawed - overwhelmingly (in those states). I think the restrictions are a bad idea and short-sighted but let republicans try to defend them nationally. Plus, how dumb have Dems been? That's a big disappointment. #1 RBG should have retired when they had the chance. #2 Clinton was always a bad nominee. For a second, I thought Trump would save her by being the worst politician in American history. But no. She couldn't even beat him where it counted. Republicans play the long game. They play for keeps.
SCOTUS's second amendment and prayer rulings seem off the rails. They have elevated guns into a cult ideology. It's dangerous. If the state cannot regulate guns, what next? We see the result. The prayer thing is the inevitable result of having religious hypocrites on the bench.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Que on June 28, 2022, 12:57:13 AM
The judiciary in the US has always been too political. A major design flaw that combined with the unbalanced and politised electoral system could (will) lead to a constitutional crisis.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Johnnie Burgess on June 28, 2022, 03:42:25 AM
Quote from: milk on June 27, 2022, 08:58:12 PM
The gun and prayer rulings bother me more than the Roe. I really don't know if you can find protection for abortion in the constitution and half the states seem to want it outlawed - overwhelmingly (in those states). I think the restrictions are a bad idea and short-sighted but let republicans try to defend them nationally. Plus, how dumb have Dems been? That's a big disappointment. #1 RBG should have retired when they had the chance. #2 Clinton was always a bad nominee. For a second, I thought Trump would save her by being the worst politician in American history. But no. She couldn't even beat him where it counted. Republicans play the long game. They play for keeps.
SCOTUS's second amendment and prayer rulings seem off the rails. They have elevated guns into a cult ideology. It's dangerous. If the state cannot regulate guns, what next? We see the result. The prayer thing is the inevitable result of having religious hypocrites on the bench.

Name one gun law that has kept a criminal from getting one.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on June 28, 2022, 04:34:00 AM
Quote from: Johnnie Burgess on June 28, 2022, 03:42:25 AM
Name one gun law that has kept a criminal from getting one.

Who the hell thinks this is about "criminals"?

America has a far higher rate of gun violence than any comparable country. Now this could possibly be because you're all a bunch of criminals and psychopaths who lack the levels of self-control that we have in other countries.

More likely it's because a heck of a lot of people aren't "criminals" right up until the point that they start shooting, and you keep making it possible for them to grab a gun.

Do we have criminals with guns in Australia? Absolutely. In fact at the moment in Sydney we have criminals shooting each other on a fairly regular basis. There is some sort of gang war going on, and there's been a fair number of shootings and fatalities. But by a "fair number" I mean... I think it's less than 10 dead.

We might not stop the dedicated "criminals" getting guns. But dedicated "criminals" aren't a large part of the population, and our "criminals" seem to rarely bother shooting anyone who isn't part of their own millieu. It takes effort to get a gun. Most people don't have the incentives to make the effort. Therefore they don't have a gun to hand when they get angry, or suicidal, or they just can't have an accident with it.

Every time someone in America tries to suggest that gun controls don't work, I wonder how it is even possible in this day and age, on the internet of all places, to so thoroughly ignore that America's gun problem is uniquely American. There are only 2 possible explanations: one is that America consistently refuses to employ the measures that work everywhere else, the other is that you lot are uniquely psychotic. You choose.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on June 28, 2022, 04:51:38 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on June 26, 2022, 11:45:29 AM
Justice Scalia quoted by Wikipedia:
"The theory of originalism treats a constitution like a statute, and gives it the meaning that its words were understood to bear at the time they were promulgated. You will sometimes hear it described as the theory of original intent. You will never hear me refer to original intent, because as I say I am first of all a textualist, and secondly an originalist. If you are a textualist, you don't care about the intent, and I don't care if the framers of the Constitution had some secret meaning in mind when they adopted its words. I take the words as they were promulgated to the people of the United States, and what is the fairly understood meaning of those words."

And yet Scalia, the hypocrite conservative, apparently ignored original meaning when he interpreted the 2nd Amendment to mean that bearing arms mean for personal self-defense rather than just security of the nation.  The best thing about Scalia is that he is dead.  Unfortunately Clarence and Barrett carry on his tradition.

The clearest case of cynical hypocrisy in Scalia's alleged originalism is Citizens United. Unless one believes the founding fathers meant to say that corporations are people and their money is speech.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on June 28, 2022, 05:06:49 AM
Quote from: Johnnie Burgess on June 28, 2022, 03:42:25 AM
Name one gun law that has kept a criminal from getting one.
Madiel seems to have a good response but I don't quite understand your question. My mind is open regarding this question. I guess we would be looking for research that compares something to something. What are the something-s? I live in Japan. There's almost no gun violence here, certainly none affecting "regular folk." But that might be a bad comparison. Maybe you should suggest what the comparison is.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on June 28, 2022, 05:16:16 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on June 28, 2022, 04:51:38 AM
The clearest case of cynical hypocrisy in Scalia's alleged originalism is Citizens United. Unless one believes the founding fathers meant to say that corporations are people and their money is speech.

Yes, Citizens United is a truly appalling decision (which our own High Court very pointedly refused to follow when discussing our own campaign finance laws).

But it's just one part of the way in which American politics avoids having ordinary people elect the politicians. Folk keep talking about doing away with the Electoral College, but that's nowhere near as big an issue as campaign finance, gerrymandering and voter suppression.

The whole reason that politicians can get away with ignoring the opinion of the general population on something like gun control is that they've built an electoral system where it's very hard to face the consequences of going against the wishes of the general population.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Johnnie Burgess on June 28, 2022, 05:27:22 AM
Quote from: Madiel on June 28, 2022, 04:34:00 AM
Who the hell thinks this is about "criminals"?

America has a far higher rate of gun violence than any comparable country. Now this could possibly be because you're all a bunch of criminals and psychopaths who lack the levels of self-control that we have in other countries.

More likely it's because a heck of a lot of people aren't "criminals" right up until the point that they start shooting, and you keep making it possible for them to grab a gun.

Do we have criminals with guns in Australia? Absolutely. In fact at the moment in Sydney we have criminals shooting each other on a fairly regular basis. There is some sort of gang war going on, and there's been a fair number of shootings and fatalities. But by a "fair number" I mean... I think it's less than 10 dead.

We might not stop the dedicated "criminals" getting guns. But dedicated "criminals" aren't a large part of the population, and our "criminals" seem to rarely bother shooting anyone who isn't part of their own millieu. It takes effort to get a gun. Most people don't have the incentives to make the effort. Therefore they don't have a gun to hand when they get angry, or suicidal, or they just can't have an accident with it.

Every time someone in America tries to suggest that gun controls don't work, I wonder how it is even possible in this day and age, on the internet of all places, to so thoroughly ignore that America's gun problem is uniquely American. There are only 2 possible explanations: one is that America consistently refuses to employ the measures that work everywhere else, the other is that you lot are uniquely psychotic. You choose.

Over 90% of people who legally own a gun never break the law.  Why take away their gun?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Johnnie Burgess on June 28, 2022, 05:29:52 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on June 28, 2022, 04:51:38 AM
The clearest case of cynical hypocrisy in Scalia's alleged originalism is Citizens United. Unless one believes the founding fathers meant to say that corporations are people and their money is speech.

If corporations can not give money to politicians neither should labor unions.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on June 28, 2022, 06:06:13 AM
Quote from: Johnnie Burgess on June 28, 2022, 05:27:22 AM
Over 90% of people who legally own a gun never break the law.  Why take away their gun?

I can see that risk-benefit analysis is not your forte.

I mean, I don't even know where you're getting that statistic from, but if you think that 90% is a high figure, you've got to be kidding given the consequences. A woman I used to know on a message board probably only broke the law once. 3 people died as a result. Including her.

And you're suggesting it's okay if MILLIONS of people break a gun law. Because hey, it isn't the majority of the estimated 81 million gun owners. It's less than 10 million! How many people can they manage to kill or maim?

Here's another statistic for you: only 1 out of 23 attempted uses of a gun for self defence actually works. 1 in 23. The other 22 occurrences are accidental shootings or homicides or where the baddy gets the gun.

Now I don't know about you, but if I had a device that failed over 95% of the time, I'd be getting rid of it. The question isn't so much why take away people's guns, the question is more how so many Americans have been conned into believing that their gun is useful into them instead of a potential death trap they have brought into their house.

Most families won't have a child drown in their pool, why have pool fences? Most children won't be poisoned by pills, why have safety caps on bottles? Not THAT many people die in car crashes, why require seat belts?

You're basically exhibiting the mindset that people go around wearing white hats and black hats and that we can basically allow all the people in white hats to walk around with guns. It's the people in the white hats that are the problem, because they're too fucking stupid to understand the profound danger that they are putting themselves and others in for no observable benefit. People buying bread makers they don't need is funny. People buying deadly weapons they don't need is inviting disaster.

Why take away people's guns? To save people's lives. There's actual data to back up that goal. Whereas there isn't data to back up most of the deluded fantasies of American gun owners as to why they claim to want one.

And if you accidentally or mistakenly shoot me (which is more common than crime) the fact that you didn't break the law is scant consolation.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on June 28, 2022, 06:08:03 AM
Quote from: Johnnie Burgess on June 28, 2022, 05:29:52 AM
If corporations can not give money to politicians neither should labor unions.

That isn't the test. The question is whether there is any limit to the amount of money that can be given.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on June 28, 2022, 06:28:21 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 28, 2022, 06:22:37 AM
All good plain sense. Of course, Reason is practically dormant among "ammosexuals."

Well it's worth noting that decades ago  Congress actively suppressed efforts to research guns and gather data, for fear that the research might show guns were a problem. So there's reasoning involved. It's just that the reasoning is not aimed at improving the welfare of the general populace.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 28, 2022, 06:40:22 AM
Quote from: Madiel on June 28, 2022, 06:28:21 AM
Well it's worth noting that decades ago  Congress actively suppressed efforts to research guns and gather data, for fear that the research might show guns were a problem. So there's reasoning involved. It's just that the reasoning is not aimed at improving the welfare of the general populace.

Indeed.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on June 28, 2022, 06:52:09 AM
Quote from: Johnnie Burgess on June 28, 2022, 05:29:52 AM
If corporations can not give money to politicians neither should labor unions.

Unions don't use mandatory contributions (dues) to fund campaigns and political activities. They support PACs through voluntary contributions of individual members. So the conclusion, based on your own statement, would seem to be that corporations shouldn't be allowed to give money to politicians, right? But to be serious: The difference here is between voluntary contributions of individuals versus contributions of corporate entities. In unions the right of free speech, if we are equating money to speech as Citizens United does, accrues only to individuals, which is in line with what the framers clearly intended in the Bill of Rights. Citizens United extended the right of free speech (monetarily defined) to corporations, which is clearly not what the framers intended.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on June 28, 2022, 06:55:05 AM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on June 27, 2022, 11:03:45 AM
I know, right?  In the distant future there will doubtless be fantasy tales about the giant group of (they believe) True Believers, totally bamboozled and led astray by one of the least likely candidates for sainthood one is likely to meet. I think the underlying story there has to do with the rot which permeates the belief system, turning into something 180° different from where they began. No one is immune, apparently. :(

8)

Yes I do find it amusing that Christian nationalists follow and seem to worship a nihilistic, liberal atheist who only pretended to be conservative to win their vote and approval.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on June 28, 2022, 07:03:17 AM
A widespread fantasy within certain sectors of the American public seems to be that having a pistol or a rifle at home is somehow going to deter the government form becoming tyrannical --- which is highly ironic given that the self-same Americans are quite prone to decrying how tyrannical the government has become.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on June 28, 2022, 07:05:58 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 28, 2022, 06:22:37 AM
All good plain sense. Of course, Reason is practically dormant among "ammosexuals."

Plus simply restricting the sales of assault rifles (which nobody outside the military needs for any reason) would do a huge amount of good for saving lives without "taking away our guns."  It is also shocking how ignorant some people can be.  In many of these mass shootings the guns were purchased legally and not by "criminals."  People who do these shootings are mentally ill, they're not hardened criminals that are knocking over liquor stores.

And we have hard proof that gun control works.  Most countries have strict laws and they rarely have mass shootings.  While the US is at the point where there are so many shootings that it is now a daily occurrence that are frequently reported now only on the local news.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: fbjim on June 28, 2022, 07:32:33 AM
To be frank I've always been of the opinion that restricting the power and availability of semi-automatic handguns is far more important than "assault rifles".
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on June 28, 2022, 08:14:48 AM
Quote from: DavidW on June 28, 2022, 07:05:58 AM

And we have hard proof that gun control works.  Most countries have strict laws and they rarely have mass shootings.  While the US is at the point where there are so many shootings that it is now a daily occurrence that are frequently reported now only on the local news.

In Canada we have had much stricter guns laws than the USA.  Pivotal dates were 1990 when licenses for all gun ownership was required, and 1995 when all guns -- including previously owed -- had to be registered.  From '95 magazines were restricted to 5 round for rifles, (excepting .22 rimfire), and 10 rounds for hand guns.
OK, so have gun deaths decreased since the tighter rules from 1990?  Yes, they have -- and of course gun deaths in Canada have always been much less than in the USA.

However statistics like this report (https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/en/catalogue/82-003-X20040048042), show that gun deaths were going down since at least 1979, first year of that report, at a pretty consistent rate and that apparently the stricter gun laws since 1990 have made little or no difference.  Notice the the principle decrease is suicides which was also the case before '79.  The likely primary reason for falling rates of gun deaths in Canada has been increasing urbanization, not the stricter gun laws.  It is still the case that gun deaths are much higher in rural areas which is mainly because there are far more guns in the hands of the public.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on June 28, 2022, 08:17:58 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on June 28, 2022, 08:14:48 AM
In Canada we have had much stricter guns laws than the USA.  Pivotal dates were 1990 when licenses for all gun ownership was required, and 1995 when all guns -- including previously owed -- had to be registered.  From '95 magazines were restricted to 5 round for rifles, (excepting .22 rimfire), and 10 rounds for hand guns.

  • Licenses required extensive background checks plus references and the specific approval of intimate partners.  License must be renewed every five years.
  • Regarding registration of guns, registration must be transferred between (license) owers if the guns is sold, given away, or inherited.  At some point the requirement as removed for some "long guns", viz. manual reload and .22 rimfire rifles and shotguns.
OK, so have gun deaths decreased since the tighter rules from 1990?  Yes, they have -- and of course gun deaths in Canada have always been much less than in the USA.

However statistics like this report (https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/en/catalogue/82-003-X20040048042), show that gun deaths were going down since at least 1979, first year of that report, at a pretty consistent rate and that apparently the stricter gun laws since 1990 have made little or no difference.  Notice the the principle decrease is suicides which was also the case before '79.  The likely primary reason for falling rates of gun deaths in Canada has been increasing urbanization, not the stricter gun laws.  It is still the case that gun deaths are much higher in rural areas which is mainly because there are far more guns in the hands of the public.

The report you linked to is nearly 20 years old and the data stops 20 years ago.

Which means it doesn't cover the majority of the period since the first law change, and even less of the period since the second law change, and who knows what other changes have happened since.

Also... the USA has had plenty of urbanisation, so do you just subscribe to the idea that Americans are innately psychos?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 28, 2022, 08:20:39 AM
Quote from: fbjim on June 28, 2022, 07:32:33 AM
To be frank I've always been of the opinion that restricting the power and availability of semi-automatic handguns is far more important than "assault rifles".

I don't see this as either/or.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on June 28, 2022, 08:24:35 AM
Quote from: DavidW on June 28, 2022, 07:05:58 AM
Plus simply restricting the sales of assault rifles (which nobody outside the military needs for any reason) would do a huge amount of good for saving lives without "taking away our guns."  It is also shocking how ignorant some people can be.  In many of these mass shootings the guns were purchased legally and not by "criminals."  People who do these shootings are mentally ill, they're not hardened criminals that are knocking over liquor stores.

Quote from: fbjim on June 28, 2022, 07:32:33 AM
To be frank I've always been of the opinion that restricting the power and availability of semi-automatic handguns is far more important than "assault rifles".

I can think of three reasons assault rifles are more dangerous than hand guns:
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 28, 2022, 08:30:20 AM
Nor do I see much point in casting assault rifles in scare-quotes. Common parlance will serve. I'll leave technical distinctions to the legislation.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Jo498 on June 28, 2022, 08:43:39 AM
How much of the gun deaths/fatalities in the US are gang violence? 70, 80%, even more? As a European I cannot help being puzzled by the number of and general stance towards guns (beyond hunting rifles) in the US but I have the suspicion that one major factor is not the sheer number of guns but that the US is in some respects, including gang violence, not really like a first world country.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/gun-deaths-by-country

(A large number of gun deaths in the US are also suicides. And now for something that might sound horribly cynical: I very much prefer that people use guns rather than trains as surefire suicide method. The latter really sucks for the train drivers who often get traumatized and the passengers who get delayed.)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: fbjim on June 28, 2022, 08:50:02 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 28, 2022, 08:20:39 AM
I don't see this as either/or.

True but I think mass school shootings with assault rifles are sort of like plane crashes versus car crashes, where they get a lot of press despite their relative rarity (and I no way intend to suggest they aren't problems, or tragedies) whereas "normal" shootings which are deadly due to the wide availability of powerful handguns get ignored.

And it also tends to shift the conversation into stupid debates on what constitutes an "assault rifle" which nobody really likes.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 28, 2022, 08:58:52 AM
Quote from: fbjim on June 28, 2022, 08:50:02 AM
True but I think mass school shootings with assault rifles are sort of like plane crashes versus car crashes, where they get a lot of press despite their relative rarity (and I no way intend to suggest they aren't problems, or tragedies) whereas "normal" shootings which are deadly due to the wide availability of powerful handguns get ignored.

And it also tends to shift the conversation into stupid debates on what constitutes an "assault rifle" which nobody really likes.

Agreed on all points.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on June 28, 2022, 09:03:10 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on June 28, 2022, 08:43:39 AM
How much of the gun deaths/fatalities in the US are gang violence? 70, 80%, even more? As a European I cannot help being puzzled by the number of and general stance towards guns (beyond hunting rifles) in the US but I have the suspicion that one major factor is not the sheer number of guns but that the US is in some respects, including gang violence, not really like a first world country.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/gun-deaths-by-country

(A large number of gun deaths in the US are also suicides. And now for something that might sound horribly cynical: I very much prefer that people use guns rather than trains as surefire suicide method. The latter really sucks for the train drivers who often get traumatized and the passengers who get delayed.)

Guns are convenient. Trains require waiting and planning.

Really, the clearest effect by far of gun laws is to reduce suicides. The idea that people will simply switch suicide methods IS A MYTH. And that's because the vast majority of suicide attempts are impulsive. They're not carried out if there isn't a means of carrying out available at the time of the impulse.

So yes, guns ARE an efficient means of carrying out suicide. And that's exactly the whole problem. Just as guns are an efficient way of expressing an anger impulse, and a quick and "efficient" way of making a mistake about someone's identity or intentions.

The notion that people will find another means of achieving the same result is simply not true in a large number of cases. Because the result only happened when a gun made the result quick and simple. By the time a suicidal person gets to the train station, there's a good chance they will no longer be suicidal. And you never find out about all of the people who THOUGHT about throwing themselves in front of a train but never did it because the thought had passed by the time they were near a train.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: LKB on June 28, 2022, 09:15:26 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on June 28, 2022, 06:52:09 AM
Unions don't use mandatory contributions (dues) to fund campaigns and political activities. They support PACs through voluntary contributions of individual members. So the conclusion, based on your own statement, would seem to be that corporations shouldn't be allowed to give money to politicians, right? But to be serious: The difference here is between voluntary contributions of individuals versus contributions of corporate entities. In unions the right of free speech, if we are equating money to speech as Citizens United does, accrues only to individuals, which is in line with what the framers clearly intended in the Bill of Rights. Citizens United extended the right of free speech (monetarily defined) to corporations, which is clearly not what the framers intended.
8⁸⁷⁷77 I 877⁷⅞
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on June 28, 2022, 09:21:47 AM
Quote from: LKB on June 28, 2022, 09:15:26 AM
8⁸⁷⁷77 I 877⁷⅞

You kind of lost me there - possibly even others ...? 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on June 28, 2022, 09:28:02 AM
Quote from: Madiel on June 28, 2022, 09:03:10 AM
Really, the clearest effect by far of gun laws is to reduce suicides. The idea that people will simply switch suicide methods IS A MYTH. And that's because the vast majority of suicide attempts are impulsive. They're not carried out if there isn't a means of carrying out available at the time of the impulse.

Ummm. not quite.

Cutting one's veins with a kitchen knife is a very effective suicide method. So is jumping off the window or ingurgitating all drugs one finds in the house. 

The whole idea of gun control is to drastically reduce the possibility of a nutjob to kill other people. A suicidal person will always find a way to do it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Jo498 on June 28, 2022, 09:31:16 AM
You don't let yourself run over at a train station but elsewhere when a train is at normal speed and less people around. But, of course, it's not something one can do impulsively and many people might get back to their senses on their way to the train track but not with a gun rack in the house.
However, I don't think suicide prevention should be a main justification for strict gun laws. (And I actually never heard this before as a central argument against liberal gun laws.)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on June 28, 2022, 09:54:08 AM
Quote from: Florestan on June 28, 2022, 09:28:02 AM
Ummm. not quite.

Cutting one's veins with a kitchen knife is a very effective suicide method. So is jumping off the window or ingurgitating all drugs one finds in the house. 

The whole idea of gun control is to drastically reduce the possibility of a nutjob to kill other people. A suicidal person will always find a way to do it.

The research says otherwise. Actual research. Not "common sense". Actual data that shows how reducing access to guns correlates to fewer suicides.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on June 28, 2022, 09:55:14 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on June 28, 2022, 09:31:16 AM
You don't let yourself run over at a train station but elsewhere when a train is at normal speed and less people around. But, of course, it's not something one can do impulsively and many people might get back to their senses on their way to the train track

Actually, beside Anna Karenina I neither know, or heard of, any other person who commited suicide by jumping in front of a train. ;D


Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on June 28, 2022, 09:58:24 AM
Quote from: Madiel on June 28, 2022, 09:54:08 AM
The research says otherwise. Actual research. Not "common sense". Actual data that shows how reducing access to guns correlates to fewer suicides.

What do Australian research and data show? What are the ten most common suicide methods used in Australia?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on June 28, 2022, 10:11:00 AM
Quote from: Florestan on June 28, 2022, 09:58:24 AM
What do Australian research and data show? What are the ten most common suicide methods used in Australia?

Knock yourself out. There's Australian research in the episodes and the links amongst others.

https://gimletmedia.com/amp/shows/science-vs/z3hlvr

https://gimletmedia.com/amp/shows/science-vs/o2hojg/gun-control-pt-2

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on June 28, 2022, 10:20:14 AM
Or here is one of the Australian things directly. https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2010/192/8/suicide-australia-meta-analysis-rates-and-methods-suicide-between-1988-and-2007

2007 is a bit old, I don't know if there is a newer study.

This and other sources will make a similar key point: attempts with a gun are more likely to be successful than attempts with other methods. Even when people are suicidal, and make an attempt, it matters what means they have available. I briefly saw an American source where guns represented a tiny fraction of unsuccessful attempts and a majority of successful ones.

I mean, the whole POINT of guns is to make killing quicker and simpler. It shouldn't be a surprise that losing access to guns makes it more difficult.

Every time someone claims that people will kill themselves or others anyway, it's basically a claim that guns don't WORK. Like claiming that motor cars have no bearing on the distances that people choose to travel.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on June 28, 2022, 10:49:26 AM
Quote from: Madiel on June 28, 2022, 10:20:14 AM
Or here is one of the Australian things directly. https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2010/192/8/suicide-australia-meta-analysis-rates-and-methods-suicide-between-1988-and-2007

2007 is a bit old, I don't know if there is a newer study.

This and other sources will make a similar key point: attempts with a gun are more likely to be successful than attempts with other methods.

Which only proves my point: if Australian gun laws, though being much stricter than the USA gun laws, cannot prevent suicidal people from killing themselves mostly with a gun, yet gun mass killing in Australia are far fewer than in the USA, then the whole point of gun control is to prevent a nutjob from killing other people, not to prevent suicides. Heck, killing other people is a criminal offense, suicide is not.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 28, 2022, 10:58:54 AM
Quote from: Florestan on June 28, 2022, 09:55:14 AM
Actually, beside Anna Karenina I neither know, or heard of, any other person who commited suicide by jumping in front of a train. ;D




It's happened on American subways, more frequently than anyone likes.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on June 28, 2022, 11:13:43 AM
In today's testimony from Cassidy Hutchinson we learned that Donald Trump was aware that many of his supporters hanging around just outside the security perimeter for his speech at the ellipse were armed and were refusing to enter the area because they would have had to pass through magnetometers, where their weapons, including AR-15s and other firearms, would have been confiscated. Trump demanded that the magnetometer scans cease and that his armed supporters be allowed to enter with their weapons because "they aren't here to hurt me." He said this knowing that armed supporters would proceed directly from there to the capitol after hearing him exhort them to fight like hell. Trump was purposely inciting a crowd he knew to be armed to march on the capitol at a time when he fully planned to accompany the armed insurrection.

Furthermore, and hilariously, Trump actually physically assaulted the driver of his limousine when he found out his staff and security detail, in part trying to save his dumb ass from participating in the actual attack, were returning to the White House. Also in the funny category are the descriptions of Drumpf throwing his lunch against the wall, breaking plates, and tossing whole table settings to the floor. The rampaging toddler president.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on June 28, 2022, 11:18:00 AM
Quote from: Florestan on June 28, 2022, 09:55:14 AM
Actually, beside Anna Karenina I neither know, or heard of, any other person who commited suicide by jumping in front of a train. ;D

Hah! You have never lived in New York City. :)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on June 28, 2022, 11:33:39 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on June 28, 2022, 11:18:00 AM
Hah! You have never lived in New York City. :)

Never indeed.

I mean, there's the Bucharest subway but in 40 years there has been exactly one suicide, and exactly one assassination attempt, in which a person jumped, or was pushed, in front of the train. Otoh, in 40 years there has been no such case in any of the Bucharest railway stations.

I guess Bucharest is either a safer or a saner city than New York.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on June 28, 2022, 11:58:25 AM
A large amount of Danish train staff will statistically be confronted with train suicides; the numbers say 1 in each train driver's career. Some will see several cases. In 2018, there were 31. Various measures are taken, including trauma treatment options etc., it's considered an unfortunate, but likely part of the job, perhaps cutting 5 years of their expected lifetime due to the stress involved.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on June 28, 2022, 12:08:22 PM
Quote from: MusicTurner on June 28, 2022, 11:58:25 AM
A majority of Danish train staff will statistically be confronted with train suicides; some will see several cases. In 2018, there were 31. Various measures are taken, including trauma treatment options etc., it's considered an unfortunate, but  likely part of the job.

By far most suicides in Romania are committed by shooting themselves but then again it's mostly policemen and military personnel, ie persons with easy, rather unrestricted access to guns.

A cousin of mine attempted suicide twice: first by cutting his veins, second by ingurgitating a huge amount of drugs. Both attempts were unsuccesfull. He eventually died of amygdalian cancer.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on June 28, 2022, 12:10:58 PM
Quote from: greg on June 27, 2022, 02:42:16 PM
Oh, ok. So because of Jan.6, it's okay if people burn down the Supreme Court or the Justice's homes. So it's not a problem then.

Nobody's burning down the Supreme Court.

They are demonstrating in front of that building, that's all.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on June 28, 2022, 12:15:58 PM
greg should take several deep breaths before posting. He may still wind up gibbering, but at least there will have been the attempt to supply the brain with oxygen.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on June 28, 2022, 12:19:17 PM
Quote from: Florestan on June 28, 2022, 12:08:22 PM
By far most suicides in Romania are committed by shooting themselves but then again it's mostly policemen and military personnel, ie persons with easy, rather unrestricted access to guns.

A cousin of mine attempted suicide twice: first by cutting his veins, second by ingurgitating a huge amount of drugs. Both attempts were unsuccesfull. He eventually died of amygdalian cancer.

I think hanging is the most common here, but haven't read much about it. Of course, one will hear various, unusual stories related to it, such as a woman jumping out from our famous Round Tower, or a man drinking large quantities of alcohol on his wife's grave, in a frosty night. But the metropolitan train ones affect everyone in their daily life too, since the train system goes down.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Jo498 on June 28, 2022, 12:22:54 PM
Quote from: Florestan on June 28, 2022, 09:55:14 AM
Actually, beside Anna Karenina I neither know, or heard of, any other person who commited suicide by jumping in front of a train. ;D
I travelled a considerable amount by train in Germany around 2010-13 and delays are quite frequent because of suicides. (Although I think I was usually indirectly affected, i.e. not in the hitting train but in another one behind that had than take a different route because the suicide spot is blocked for hours.) They have a euphemism or don't say anything, so in principle it could also be an accident or an animal. But I think it's almost always suicides.

Besides Anna Karenina, there were a few rather famous ones, 10 or 15 years ago some elderly entrepreneur of a locally well known company (gone broke or in dire straits) and most prominent about two years ago a financial minister of Hesse (who was in line to become the next Ministerpräsident (governor) of the state). The last might have been because he had panicked that some financial scandal of a few years ago might deepen and/or the Covid outbreak.
(The most spectacular but unproven probable suicide was another disgraced politician, Möllemann, who died skydiving...)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Florestan on June 28, 2022, 12:26:24 PM
Quote from: MusicTurner on June 28, 2022, 12:19:17 PM
I think hanging is the most common here, but haven't read much about it. Of course, one will hear various, unusual stories related to it, such as a woman jumping out from our famous Round Tower, or a man drinking large quantities of alcohol on his wife's grave, in a frosty night. But the metropolitan train ones affect everyone in their daily life too, since the train system goes down.

The most gruelsome suicide in Romania which I know of involved a man driving his car full speed, lights off, on the other way lane of the highway. He killed himself and a family of five. This I cannot understand for the life of me (pun): if you want to kill yourself, there are many ways to do it without taking other people's life.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on June 28, 2022, 12:43:46 PM
Quote from: Florestan on June 28, 2022, 12:26:24 PM
The most gruelsome suicide in Romania which I know of involved a man driving his car full speed, lights off, on the other way lane of the highway. He killed himself and a family of five. This I cannot understand for the life of me (pun): if you want to kill yourself, there are many ways to do it without taking other people's life.

Yes, in most cases, it tends to be a man doing that, I think.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on June 28, 2022, 02:31:05 PM
Quote from: Florestan on June 28, 2022, 10:49:26 AM
Which only proves my point: if Australian gun laws, though being much stricter than the USA gun laws, cannot prevent suicidal people from killing themselves mostly with a gun, yet gun mass killing in Australia are far fewer than in the USA, then the whole point of gun control is to prevent a nutjob from killing other people, not to prevent suicides. Heck, killing other people is a criminal offense, suicide is not.

Um, you totally missed the point. It does prevent people from killing themselves with a gun. Because fewer people get hold of a gun.

If 10 people try to kill themselves with a gun each year and 9 succeed, that's still a much smaller number than 500 people trying each year and 450 succeeding despite a 90% success rate in both cases. It's the difference between 9 deaths and 450 deaths. The other 490 people who either switched methods or didn't try at all have a better chance of surviving.

Dying from Covid isn't a criminal offence either, and yet we still tried to cut the number of people dying from Covid, before vaccines were around, by reducing the number of people catching Covid. Did we cut the PERCENTAGE OF INFECTED PEOPLE WHO DIED? Probably not much. Did we cut the NUMBER OF INFECTED PEOPLE? Yes.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on June 28, 2022, 02:51:41 PM
Quote from: Florestan on June 28, 2022, 12:08:22 PM
By far most suicides in Romania are committed by shooting themselves but then again it's mostly policemen and military personnel, ie persons with easy, rather unrestricted access to guns.

A cousin of mine attempted suicide twice: first by cutting his veins, second by ingurgitating a huge amount of drugs. Both attempts were unsuccesfull. He eventually died of amygdalian cancer.

See? You're denying my points and then making them for me. You've literally just stated that there are more successful suicide attempts when guns are easily accessible.

We reduced access to guns. The number of suicides went down.

You also tried to tell me earlier that cutting yourself is an efficient method of suicide. Yet here you are with personal knowledge that it's less efficient than shooting.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on June 28, 2022, 03:33:53 PM
Quote from: Madiel on June 28, 2022, 08:17:58 AM
The report you linked to is nearly 20 years old and the data stops 20 years ago.

Which means it doesn't cover the majority of the period since the first law change, and even less of the period since the second law change, and who knows what other changes have happened since.

Also... the USA has had plenty of urbanisation, so do you just subscribe to the idea that Americans are innately psychos?

Well that report (https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/82-003-x/2004004/article/8042-eng.pdf) was 2005, not recent, but more than a decade after the strictest laws were introduced.  As for what has changed since, I know because I am a Canadian gun owner.

There has been a recent increase in the use by criminals in major urban areas, especially by gangs.  Most of these guns do not come from legal sources, (i.e. by theft or "straw purchase" the latter being much rarer in Canada than the USA).  Organized crime including gangs get their guns my smuggling in from the USA.

Assault rifles were retroactively banned in Canada about a year-and-a-half ago but so far the government has issued no instruction for the surrender of those guns.  Presently owners my keep the guns but can't be legal used as before, e.g. taken to a range to shoot targets.  The government also promised financial compensation to owners but has done nothing about that either..

A few weeks ago the government announced they will make a law to the make illegal the import, sale, purchase, and transfer of handguns.  Owners may keep their guns and shoot them at certified ranges but may not dispose of the except to surrender them to police.  Note that this means that financial value of owners' guns is effectively confiscated without compensation.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on June 28, 2022, 04:10:55 PM
They don't get money if they surrender the gun to police? Okay, interesting.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on June 29, 2022, 12:22:42 AM
Quote from: Florestan on June 28, 2022, 09:55:14 AM
Actually, beside Anna Karenina I neither know, or heard of, any other person who commited suicide by jumping in front of a train.

These things are not published in the papers, because of copycat behavior.

However, people jump in front of trains quite often, unfortunately.

This is not something to discuss lightly.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Jo498 on June 29, 2022, 01:17:24 AM
Quote from: Madiel on June 28, 2022, 02:31:05 PM
Dying from Covid isn't a criminal offence either, and yet we still tried to cut the number of people dying from Covid, before vaccines were around, by reducing the number of people catching Covid. Did we cut the PERCENTAGE OF INFECTED PEOPLE WHO DIED? Probably not much. Did we cut the NUMBER OF INFECTED PEOPLE? Yes.
Yes, and in all these cases (also smoking, drinking, speed limits etc.) it is far from obvious if certain measures are justified because some reduction of lives lost or not because of the restraints in liberty for the 70%, 90% or so affected negatively by the prohibition (or by the general loss of a liberty to make one's own choices). A speed limit of 50 km/h on the freeway would certainly result in fewer deaths from traffic accidents. But most people would agree that it would also largely defeat the purpose of freeways.

If one goes by numbers, one of the most efficient measures for longer, more healthy lives in many Western countries would be a thoroughly paternalist treatment of overweight people and the food industry because of all the health and life lost because of obesity. But for good (liberty) and probably some not so good (food lobby) reasons, we don't do this.

(Again, I personally share the European puzzlement at the liberal gun laws; if it was up to me, I'd have no problem at all to forbid any ownership except for hunting/sports shooting and even have background checks etc. for the latter. But there is no straightforward argument from possible loss of lives to (what are perceived as) severe restrictions of liberty.)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on June 29, 2022, 02:40:59 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on June 29, 2022, 01:17:24 AM
Yes, and in all these cases (also smoking, drinking, speed limits etc.) it is far from obvious if certain measures are justified because some reduction of lives lost or not because of the restraints in liberty for the 70%, 90% or so affected negatively by the prohibition (or by the general loss of a liberty to make one's own choices). A speed limit of 50 km/h on the freeway would certainly result in fewer deaths from traffic accidents. But most people would agree that it would also largely defeat the purpose of freeways.

If one goes by numbers, one of the most efficient measures for longer, more healthy lives in many Western countries would be a thoroughly paternalist treatment of overweight people and the food industry because of all the health and life lost because of obesity. But for good (liberty) and probably some not so good (food lobby) reasons, we don't do this.

(Again, I personally share the European puzzlement at the liberal gun laws; if it was up to me, I'd have no problem at all to forbid any ownership except for hunting/sports shooting and even have background checks etc. for the latter. But there is no straightforward argument from possible loss of lives to (what are perceived as) severe restrictions of liberty.)

Agreed, it's necessary to have a cost benefit analysis.

But for guns, the analysis isn't very hard in situations where the claimed benefit of a gun is false. That's where I started: when guns are supposedly kept in America for self-defence, only 1 in 23 uses of the gun actually ends up being for that purpose.

Having a gun in your house doesn't protect you from violence, it actually significantly increases your own risk of being shot.

So it's not a case like the ones you mentioned where it's necessary to weigh up real trade-offs. Guns are simply really, REALLY useless at the same time as being dangerous.

I'm not talking about situations like hunting. But a huge number of the guns in America are owned by people who have been completely conned into believing the gun is for "protection", when all the data says the exact opposite.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on June 29, 2022, 02:49:52 AM
I note that Australia has banned tanning beds, which is a similar situation: they're advertised as providing a safer tan than going out in the sun, when the science shows they are MORE dangerous.

No-one needs the "right" to a product that claims to improve your safety but actually does the exact opposite.

The fact that the Supreme Court struck down a law, over a century old, that said "you need to explain why you need a gun" is basically a complete rejection of evidence-based risk analysis. If those judges believe that a person has the right to carry a gun for protection, it would have been good for them to engage with the research that says a gun DOESN'T protect in these situations.

The 2nd Amendment has a purpose built into it, and yet they completely ignore purpose.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on June 29, 2022, 03:04:23 AM
Quote from: Madiel on June 28, 2022, 04:10:55 PM
They don't get money if they surrender the gun to police? Okay, interesting.

In Canada, as it stands, no compensation is paid on surrender of a firearm.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on June 29, 2022, 03:24:23 AM
Quote from: Madiel on June 29, 2022, 02:40:59 AM
Agreed, it's necessary to have a cost benefit analysis.

But for guns, the analysis isn't very hard in situations where the claimed benefit of a gun is false. That's where I started: when guns are supposedly kept in America for self-defence, only 1 in 23 uses of the gun actually ends up being for that purpose.

Having a gun in your house doesn't protect you from violence, it actually significantly increases your own risk of being shot.

So it's not a case like the ones you mentioned where it's necessary to weigh up real trade-offs. Guns are simply really, REALLY useless at the same time as being dangerous.

I'm not talking about situations like hunting. But a huge number of the guns in America are owned by people who have been completely conned into believing the gun is for "protection", when all the data says the exact opposite.

I'd like to reemphasize that in Canada laws were pretty much along these lines even before recent changes, i.e.
I point out that requirements in Canada as of 1995 far exceeds anything even proposed in the USA;  there are recent restrictions that go much further.

A "gun culture" in the USA exists that really doesn't exist almost any other country, and then, of course, there is the 2nd Amendment.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on June 29, 2022, 03:46:47 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on June 29, 2022, 03:24:23 AM
I'd like to reemphasize that in Canada laws were pretty much along these lines even before recent changes, i.e.

  • Previous and new users much have a license that is only granted after an extensive background check -- note that there is no talk in the USA of a US Federal req't of licensing, only background checks
  • A prospective owner in Canada must state his reason for wanting a gun:  permitted reasons are hunting, (including farm varmint control), target shooting, and collecting (which requires special storage req'ts and possible inspections of premises) -- self-protection is NOT a recognized a reason for gun ownership in Canada as it is in the USA
  • All handguns and (most) assault-style rifles must be registered to the current owner.
I point out that requirements in Canada as of 1995 far exceeds anything even proposed in the USA;  there are recent restrictions that go much further.

A "gun culture" in the USA exists that really doesn't exist almost any other country, and then, of course, there is the 2nd Amendment.

It sounds like your laws have been similar to Australian ones in many respects.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: LKB on June 29, 2022, 04:05:50 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on June 28, 2022, 09:21:47 AM
You kind of lost me there - possibly even others ...?

Don't tell me, nobody here understands Trafalmadorian???.  :D

Actually, l dozed off while apparently touching my phone, sorry for any confusion.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on June 29, 2022, 04:06:32 AM
Quote from: LKB on June 29, 2022, 04:05:50 AM
Don't tell me, nobody here understands Trafalmadorian???.  :D

Actually, l dozed off while apparently touching my phone, sorry for any confusion.

Ok, it has been explained then  :laugh:  :laugh:
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on June 29, 2022, 05:36:14 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 28, 2022, 12:15:58 PM
greg should take several deep breaths before posting. He may still wind up gibbering, but at least there will have been the attempt to supply the brain with oxygen.
That seems like overly insulting/demeaning language. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on June 29, 2022, 06:05:45 AM
Quote from: LKB on June 29, 2022, 04:05:50 AM
Don't tell me, nobody here understands Trafalmadorian???.  :D

Actually, l dozed off while apparently touching my phone, sorry for any confusion.

I thought it was secret code!  I don't know how many times I read that post going "what!?" I didn't have my secret decoder ring.  BE SURE TO DRINK YOUR OVALTINE. :laugh:
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on June 29, 2022, 06:22:56 AM
Quote from: milk on June 29, 2022, 05:36:14 AM
That seems like overly insulting/demeaning language.

Well,  I don't know about the 'overly' part,  but it is probably over the line,  I'm sure Karl won't repeat it.  As I said in another thread last night,  no one has suddenly given the green light to ad hominem  attacks or insulting/demeaning language,  even when logic demands it.

🤠😎
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: MusicTurner on June 29, 2022, 08:39:20 AM
Quote from: DavidW on June 29, 2022, 06:05:45 AM
I thought it was secret code!  I don't know how many times I read that post going "what!?" I didn't have my secret decoder ring.  BE SURE TO DRINK YOUR OVALTINE. :laugh:

I tried checking those numbers with US amendments and other stuff ...
  ;D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: LKB on June 29, 2022, 08:53:27 AM
Quote from: MusicTurner on June 29, 2022, 08:39:20 AM
I tried checking those numbers with US amendments and other stuff ...
  ;D

Actually, I've pretty much forgotten my native tongue... too many decades here with y'all on this cozy little planet.  ;)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on June 29, 2022, 08:54:38 AM
Quote from: Madiel on June 29, 2022, 03:46:47 AM
It sounds like your laws have been similar to Australian ones in many respects.

The practical difference between Canada and Australia gun control laws but the fact that is far easier to smuggle untraceable guns into Canada from the USA.

The USA is a vast pool of guns available to smugglers for export.  Beyond reasonable doubt is that the recently increased use of guns in the commission of crimes in major Canadian cities is due to the availability of smuggled weapons.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Daverz on June 29, 2022, 08:55:43 AM
Quote from: milk on June 29, 2022, 05:36:14 AM
That seems like overly insulting/demeaning language.

But good advice.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on June 29, 2022, 09:55:22 AM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on June 27, 2022, 02:50:50 PM
You have no idea what websites I visit, so are in no position to adopt a supercilious attitude with me.
I meant to write "you all," not meant to be directed hyperfocused at you specifically, but it didn't come out that way- so my bad.


Quote from: Gurn Blanston on June 27, 2022, 02:50:50 PM
Let me just say this, it should bother you at a conceptual level to realize that you seem to think that enough Libs can be so congruent on any level that they would get together and commit uncivil disobedience. At a level high enough to actually cause problems? This sounds to me suspiciously like the Great Migrant Caravan that mysteriously disappears the day after every election....   :-\
That is definitely one thing holding the left back a lot.
But only so much... did you just forget about the months of George Floyd riots? Definitely qualifies as getting together, causing sustained civil disobedience at a high level for a very long time.


QuoteHowever, arson, vandalism, and looting that occurred between May 26 and June 8 caused approximately $1–2 billion in damages nationally, the highest recorded damage from civil disorder in U.S. history, and surpassing the record set during the 1992 Los Angeles riots
And 25 dead.

Didn't intend to bring it up, since I'm not interested in dwelling on that two years later (as people are dwelling on Jan 6 a year and a half later), but bringing up potential violence now ends up in little comparison games.


Quote from: SimonNZ on June 27, 2022, 04:44:25 PM
And elected officials on the left aren't calling for violence or amplifying those nutjob voices and would had have denounced calls for violence.

A distinction greg seems not to see.
I do see... Biden explicitly said he doesn't support violence. Which is great.
The distinction isn't really important. Violence is violence, no matter who is calling for it.



Quote from: DavidW on June 27, 2022, 03:34:48 PM
I haven't heard of the second subreddit, but the first has a strict no call for violence rule that is a ban-able offense that is strictly enforced by the mods.  And they have NOT been posting calls for violence.  Quit your BS.
Maybe it's gotten deleted then. There was less on that subreddit that I saw.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on June 29, 2022, 09:59:07 AM
Quote from: Herman on June 28, 2022, 12:10:58 PM
Nobody's burning down the Supreme Court.

They are demonstrating in front of that building, that's all.


Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 28, 2022, 12:15:58 PM
greg should take several deep breaths before posting. He may still wind up gibbering, but at least there will have been the attempt to supply the brain with oxygen.
Leftist with 159k followers.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FWFerPSXkAEcKQ0.jpg)

I just checked, took several days but finally that tweet was removed.

So no, I'm not just making stuff up, people are talking about it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on June 29, 2022, 10:01:16 AM
Quote from: milk on June 29, 2022, 05:36:14 AM
That seems like overly insulting/demeaning language.
But you should expect the abuse here. Especially when it is just pure ad hom, with no counterargument at all.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on June 29, 2022, 12:01:40 PM
Quote from: greg on June 29, 2022, 09:55:22 AM

That is definitely one thing holding the left back a lot.
But only so much... did you just forget about the months of George Floyd riots? Definitely qualifies as getting together, causing sustained civil disobedience at a high level for a very long time.

On what basis do you claim these people were leftist? Politics in that sense had nothing to do with it. Blacks, whites, and others of all parties as well as independents were involved. And you have conspicuously failed to notice that a large part of the violence was perpetrated by police and by illegally mustered paramilitary troops against peaceful protesters, reporters, and bystanders. Do you remember Trump's march to hold a bible upside down in front of a church in D.C.? That little outing entailed hundreds of assaults on innocent protesters who were obeying all applicable laws at the time. That was a riot explicitly ordered by the president and perpetrated by police, prison guards, and homeland security personnel, which makes Donald Trump the individual personally responsible for more unprovoked violence at the BLM protests than anyone else in the US. And you apparently have forgotten that Trump used federal agents outside their legal authority to kidnap people off of the streets in Portland. Another major part of the violence was due to police refusing to control, if not outright encouraging, armed counter protesters. In Kenosha the police actually unofficially deputized such people and aided and abetted even ones who were carrying firearms illegally. A good deal of the property damage and violence was instigated by counter protesters. Do you remember umbrella man breaking the windows of businesses in Portland? He wasn't BLM or antifa, he turned out to be on "the other" side.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on June 29, 2022, 01:17:55 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on June 29, 2022, 12:01:40 PM
On what basis do you claim these people were leftist? Politics in that sense had nothing to do with it. Blacks, whites, and others of all parties as well as independents were involved. And you have conspicuously failed to notice that a large part of the violence was perpetrated by police and by illegally mustered paramilitary troops against peaceful protesters, reporters, and bystanders. Do you remember Trump's march to hold a bible upside down in front of a church in D.C.? That little outing entailed hundreds of assaults on innocent protesters who were obeying all applicable laws at the time. That was a riot explicitly ordered by the president and perpetrated by police, prison guards, and homeland security personnel, which makes Donald Trump the individual personally responsible for more unprovoked violence at the BLM protests than anyone else in the US. And you apparently have forgotten that Trump used federal agents outside their legal authority to kidnap people off of the streets in Portland. Another major part of the violence was due to police refusing to control, if not outright encouraging, armed counter protesters. In Kenosha the police actually unofficially deputized such people and aided and abetted even ones who were carrying firearms illegally. A good deal of the property damage and violence was instigated by counter protesters. Do you remember umbrella man breaking the windows of businesses in Portland? He wasn't BLM or antifa, he turned out to be on "the other" side.

This.

And as I've said before on this thread, I blame Trump further for not speaking in empathy with the black community or calling for police reform or doing anything at all to defuse the situation at any point along the way, but rather did everything he could to stoke bad feeling and outrage and division to the point of explosion, because it plays better with the maga base to support bad cops and paint blacks as thugs.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on June 29, 2022, 01:25:22 PM
Quote from: greg on June 29, 2022, 09:59:07 AM

I just checked, took several days but finally that tweet was removed.

So no, I'm not just making stuff up, people are talking about it.

Every dumb thing gets said on places like twitter every day. That you can dig up a few idiot tweets says nothing about larger trends.

When you have to worry is when these ideas become acceptable and prevalent in a chorus of leaders and followers as they are with the Trumpist calls for violence. There is no culture of permission or coordinated message of shit like this from the left.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on June 29, 2022, 01:35:33 PM
Quote from: greg on June 29, 2022, 09:55:22 AM
But only so much... did you just forget about the months of George Floyd riots? Definitely qualifies as getting together, causing sustained civil disobedience at a high level for a very long time.

And 25 dead.


I didn't forget it. I have yet to see any solid evidence that it was "Leftists" anymore than anyone else. Are Lefties the only people who care about the police murdering innocent people? It shouldn't be just us. I would be glad to know that all the pissed off Blacks in this country were 'Leftists'. Somehow I think that might just be a Rightie's wet dream.  In addition, nearly everything I was able to discover gives me solid reason to believe that there were a significant number of right-wing agitators initiating the violent parts of those protests. Significantly, none of those protests took place in the Capitol Building while Congress was in session, and I just can't recall whether or not they were gonna hang Pence then either, although he has always deserved it. ;)

8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on June 30, 2022, 12:16:50 AM
Yeah. 1/6 is on Trump. He should have been convicted and barred from office. He probably should be in jail. As for the riots after the George Floyd murder, a lot of it was from the left, not all, but a lot of it. Many of my friends on the left rationalized it and many on the left still do. Some even say rioting is justified. Anyway, as a narrative, I think BLM is misplaced and yes I'm still on the left and of course racism is still a huge problem in America. I have a nuanced view of it in that I do not think black people are being murdered by racist cops in significant numbers (though of course even one innocent person killed by a cop is terrible). And I think liberal "defund the police" types pushing anti-police narratives are probably doing more harm than good to black neighborhoods. One cannot have a dialogue about these issues anymore really. Not out in the open. Looking at America from afar, it doesn't look like people can really discuss anything anymore.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on June 30, 2022, 01:51:22 AM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on June 29, 2022, 01:35:33 PM
I didn't forget it. I have yet to see any solid evidence that it was "Leftists" anymore than anyone else. Are Lefties the only people who care about the police murdering innocent people? It shouldn't be just us. I would be glad to know that all the pissed off Blacks in this country were 'Leftists'. Somehow I think that might just be a Rightie's wet dream.  In addition, nearly everything I was able to discover gives me solid reason to believe that there were a significant number of right-wing agitators initiating the violent parts of those protests. Significantly, none of those protests took place in the Capitol Building while Congress was in session, and I just can't recall whether or not they were gonna hang Pence then either, although he has always deserved it. ;)

8)

Another point I would make is that "civil disobedience" is not a bad thing. As I learned in elementary school, the purpose of civil disobedience is to peacefully stand for what you believe in, and when the authorities brutally attack, they make a public spectacle of the illegitimacy of the regime. That's what happened, for instance, when people watching television saw police in Selma Alabama and Birmingham Alabama attacking peaceful civil rights demonstrators with fire hoses and attack dogs.

(https://www.history.com/.image/c_fit%2Ccs_srgb%2Cfl_progressive%2Cq_auto:good%2Cw_620/MTc2MDk3MTc1NjQwNDgzMjQx/birmingham-childrens-crusade-gettyimages-81159913.jpg)

(https://www.blackpast.org/wp-content/uploads/prodimages/files/Firemen_turn_fire_hoses_on_demonstrators_Birmingham_Alabama_1963_Photo_by_Charles_Moore.jpg)

(https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2013/06/18/ap3967239957153-96c0664625d74f175a70507ec0a7c345bf3c5e4e.jpg)

The destruction of property that was coincident with the BLM protests was typically not part of the protest. Any event which results in a breakdown in public order brings out petty criminals and looters who take to opportunity to smash a window and grab a television, etc. Power failures in New York routinely result in widespread rioting and looting. That is what the U.S. is like.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on June 30, 2022, 03:29:59 AM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on June 30, 2022, 01:51:22 AM
Another point I would make is that "civil disobedience" is not a bad thing. As I learned in elementary school, the purpose of civil disobedience is to peacefully stand for what you believe in, and when the authorities brutally attack, they make a public spectacle of the illegitimacy of the regime. That's what happened, for instance, when people watching television saw police in Selma Alabama and Birmingham Alabama attacking peaceful civil rights demonstrators with fire hoses and attack dogs.

(https://www.history.com/.image/c_fit%2Ccs_srgb%2Cfl_progressive%2Cq_auto:good%2Cw_620/MTc2MDk3MTc1NjQwNDgzMjQx/birmingham-childrens-crusade-gettyimages-81159913.jpg)

(https://www.blackpast.org/wp-content/uploads/prodimages/files/Firemen_turn_fire_hoses_on_demonstrators_Birmingham_Alabama_1963_Photo_by_Charles_Moore.jpg)

(https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2013/06/18/ap3967239957153-96c0664625d74f175a70507ec0a7c345bf3c5e4e.jpg)

The destruction of property that was coincident with the BLM protests was typically not part of the protest. Any event which results in a breakdown in public order brings out petty criminals and looters who take to opportunity to smash a window and grab a television, etc. Power failures in New York routinely result in widespread rioting and looting. That is what the U.S. is like.
You're rationalizing and justifying. Yes, the rioting, looting and property damage were caused by many different sorts of people and incidents. However, included in this is the left-wing agitators and activists (as well as far-right agitators). Just look at who burned down the police station in Minneapolis.
Civil disobedience can be a good thing but it can also be irresponsible. Leaving aside my own opinion that there is no comparison to what was happening in the 60s in terms of injustice, when national movements come into a local community and shut down businesses, they do assume some responsibility for the results.
Returning to my own opinion: what they were asking for was what? In Wisconsin? In Atlanta? Mob justice? These were very different individual circumstances and collectively different from the Floyd case. I just think this became something of a farce, and a dangerous one. The whole point of civil disobedience is to win hearts and minds. That should be kept in view as well.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on June 30, 2022, 07:29:24 AM
Quote from: milk on June 30, 2022, 12:16:50 AM
Yeah. 1/6 is on Trump. He should have been convicted and barred from office. He probably should be in jail. As for the riots after the George Floyd murder, a lot of it was from the left, not all, but a lot of it. Many of my friends on the left rationalized it and many on the left still do. Some even say rioting is justified. Anyway, as a narrative, I think BLM is misplaced and yes I'm still on the left and of course racism is still a huge problem in America. I have a nuanced view of it in that I do not think black people are being murdered by racist cops in significant numbers (though of course even one innocent person killed by a cop is terrible). And I think liberal "defund the police" types pushing anti-police narratives are probably doing more harm than good to black neighborhoods. One cannot have a dialogue about these issues anymore really. Not out in the open. Looking at America from afar, it doesn't look like people can really discuss anything anymore.

What you fail to mention is that police intentionally fomented much of the violence at the protests and in a number of cases prison guards repurposed without insignia and border patrol agents used in the same way — that is, people trained to react violently and with impunity against any resistance — were deployed against peaceful protesters. The reflexive resort to full riot gear and truncheons was also in many cases an act of intentional incitement, as was their coddling of, encouragement of, and intentional failure to control counter protesters. In short, the law enforcement response to protests was to a significant extent intentional action with a political agenda. Violence flourished and was cultivated at protests because it was a political windfall for the Trump administration, for republican politicians, and for police chiefs and departments under pressure from defunding proposals and efforts at making police publicly and legally accountable.

As for the bold portion: There is extensive and pervasive violence against blacks. It doesn't always end with murder.   
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on June 30, 2022, 08:54:07 AM
Quote from: milk on June 30, 2022, 03:29:59 AM
You're rationalizing and justifying. Yes, the rioting, looting and property damage were caused by many different sorts of people and incidents. However, included in this is the left-wing agitators and activists (as well as far-right agitators). Just look at who burned down the police station in Minneapolis.
Civil disobedience can be a good thing but it can also be irresponsible. Leaving aside my own opinion that there is no comparison to what was happening in the 60s in terms of injustice, when national movements come into a local community and shut down businesses, they do assume some responsibility for the results.
Returning to my own opinion: what they were asking for was what? In Wisconsin? In Atlanta? Mob justice? These were very different individual circumstances and collectively different from the Floyd case. I just think this became something of a farce, and a dangerous one. The whole point of civil disobedience is to win hearts and minds. That should be kept in view as well.

On matters like this I don't pay attention to national news from any source, which has the luxury of cherry picking items to suit their narrative. I look at local news from places where I lived or have recently lived and where I understand the context. I live in the Houston area. I read in the Houston Chronicle that there was a protest drawing (as I recall) 50,000 people in Central Houston. There were no reports of significant violence or property damage. In the leafy suburb where I live a high school student organized a BLM march on social media. They marched from the main business district to a nearby park, causing minor traffic disruption. In the small California town where I used to live there was a week of protests. Protesters, at one point, walked out onto the major road through the town (US101) and blocked traffic. They were driven away by the police using tear gas and rubber bullets. I read in the local paper that three shop windows were broken in the downtown area near where the protests occurred. The 18 year old woman who was one of the main organizers of the protest has been charged with ~20 fellonies, and prosecutors want to send her to prison for more than 20 years. At the height of the protest a motorist tried to run her down with his car and she struck the car with a flag pole she was carrying. In D.C., several friends reported participating in BLM protests in the capitol. One is a lawyer, the other a technology consultant working for Reuters. They reported an uplifting experience. One referenced a post by the pastor of the church where Trump displayed the upside-down bible. They were helping protesters with water and food and were attacked and driven out of their own church by a tear gas attack by Federal agents, so that Trump could occupy their church and use it for a photo.

I am a 100% supporter of BLM, which is a decentralized organization which condemns violence in all forms. I don't think the are responsible for violence that occurs at the periphery of protests they organize, or which are conducted in their name without their involvement. Their focus is not exclusively on police violence, but on the fact that U.S. society does not value black people, which does not allow them the same access to educational, economic or social resources.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on June 30, 2022, 09:35:14 AM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on June 30, 2022, 08:54:07 AM
On matters like this I don't pay attention to national news from any source, which has the luxury of cherry picking items to suit their narrative. I look at local news from places where I lived or have recently lived and where I understand the context. I live in the Houston area. I read in the Houston Chronicle that there was a protest drawing (as I recall) 50,000 people in Central Houston. There were no reports of significant violence or property damage. In the leafy suburb where I live a high school student organized a BLM march on social media. They marched from the main business district to a nearby park, causing minor traffic disruption. In the small California town where I used to live there was a week of protests. Protesters, at one point, walked out onto the major road through the town (US101) and blocked traffic. They were driven away by the police using tear gas and rubber bullets. I read in the local paper that three shop windows were broken in the downtown area near where the protests occurred. The 18 year old woman who was one of the main organizers of the protest has been charged with ~20 fellonies, and prosecutors want to send her to prison for more than 20 years. At the height of the protest a motorist tried to run her down with his car and she struck the car with a flag pole she was carrying. In D.C., several friends reported participating in BLM protests in the capitol. One is a lawyer, the other a technology consultant working for Reuters. They reported an uplifting experience. One referenced a post by the pastor of the church where Trump displayed the upside-down bible. They were helping protesters with water and food and were attacked and driven out of their own church by a tear gas attack by Federal agents, so that Trump could occupy their church and use it for a photo.

I am a 100% supporter of BLM, which is a decentralized organization which condemns violence in all forms. I don't think the are responsible for violence that occurs at the periphery of protests they organize, or which are conducted in their name without their involvement. Their focus is not exclusively on police violence, but on the fact that U.S. society does not value black people, which does not allow them the same access to educational, economic or social resources.

Ditto, word for word. (Including the geography. In Texas terms I live "just up the road" (125 miles)).

8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on June 30, 2022, 03:25:18 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on June 30, 2022, 07:29:24 AM
What you fail to mention is that police intentionally fomented much of the violence at the protests and in a number of cases prison guards repurposed without insignia and border patrol agents used in the same way — that is, people trained to react violently and with impunity against any resistance — were deployed against peaceful protesters. The reflexive resort to full riot gear and truncheons was also in many cases an act of intentional incitement, as was their coddling of, encouragement of, and intentional failure to control counter protesters. In short, the law enforcement response to protests was to a significant extent intentional action with a political agenda. Violence flourished and was cultivated at protests because it was a political windfall for the Trump administration, for republican politicians, and for police chiefs and departments under pressure from defunding proposals and efforts at making police publicly and legally accountable.

As for the bold portion: There is extensive and pervasive violence against blacks. It doesn't always end with murder.
that's a narrative for which I'm sure you can find an example. It has happened in the past, that's for sure. I don't believe that's the whole story but I have ideas about what would change my mind. What would change yours? But I had a friend who was certain the "Umbrella man" (a man with an umbrella who broke windows) in Minneapolis was a cop. He even knew which one as it was a big rumor goin around the internet and in circles in ST. Paul and Minneapolis. They named him. I asked him, "how do you know?" His answer? "I just know." Now this turned out to be a far right wing activist. I didn't say it was the left. I just said "I don't know." I refuse to stick my fingers in my ears. The ones who burnt down the police station? Not right wingers. I'm not saying they were BLM but BLM came into Wisconsin and Atlanta and St Louis with an unquestionable narrative and a siege mentality. Many of these incidents do not fit their narrative. One can disagree. Yes, they did shut down those cities for many businesses.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on June 30, 2022, 03:26:27 PM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on June 30, 2022, 08:54:07 AM
On matters like this I don't pay attention to national news from any source, which has the luxury of cherry picking items to suit their narrative. I look at local news from places where I lived or have recently lived and where I understand the context. I live in the Houston area. I read in the Houston Chronicle that there was a protest drawing (as I recall) 50,000 people in Central Houston. There were no reports of significant violence or property damage. In the leafy suburb where I live a high school student organized a BLM march on social media. They marched from the main business district to a nearby park, causing minor traffic disruption. In the small California town where I used to live there was a week of protests. Protesters, at one point, walked out onto the major road through the town (US101) and blocked traffic. They were driven away by the police using tear gas and rubber bullets. I read in the local paper that three shop windows were broken in the downtown area near where the protests occurred. The 18 year old woman who was one of the main organizers of the protest has been charged with ~20 fellonies, and prosecutors want to send her to prison for more than 20 years. At the height of the protest a motorist tried to run her down with his car and she struck the car with a flag pole she was carrying. In D.C., several friends reported participating in BLM protests in the capitol. One is a lawyer, the other a technology consultant working for Reuters. They reported an uplifting experience. One referenced a post by the pastor of the church where Trump displayed the upside-down bible. They were helping protesters with water and food and were attacked and driven out of their own church by a tear gas attack by Federal agents, so that Trump could occupy their church and use it for a photo.

I am a 100% supporter of BLM, which is a decentralized organization which condemns violence in all forms. I don't think the are responsible for violence that occurs at the periphery of protests they organize, or which are conducted in their name without their involvement. Their focus is not exclusively on police violence, but on the fact that U.S. society does not value black people, which does not allow them the same access to educational, economic or social resources.
you're saying the local news supports your view and if it didn't, you'd change your mind? Ok.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on June 30, 2022, 04:11:03 PM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on June 30, 2022, 08:54:07 AMOn matters like this I don't pay attention to national news from any source, which has the luxury of cherry picking items to suit their narrative. I look at local news from places where I lived or have recently lived and where I understand the context.

This will almost certainly be deleted, but that is OK.  I also rely on local first-hand accounts when available.  One of my relatives was a Multnomah County Sheriff's deputy during the Portland riots.  He was called on to protect public buildings in Portland.  That included the jail, which rioters - left wing rioters - attempted to burn down.  He was there.  He heard what they were yelling, he saw the signs they carried.  He had to avoid projectiles.  Some on fire.  There were inmates inside the jail as well as officers, it should be noted.  Lives were on the line.  For real.  It was not a game.  It was not an online forum.  People faced the real risk of dying.  But people will believe what they want, as filtered through the internet.

My relative retired from the Sheriff's Office very soon afterward, as did a large number of deputies and Portland police officers.  The two agencies cannot fill the open slots.  The City of Portland just announced - as in this week - a new bonus program in a desperate attempt to fill over one hundred open positions.  Signing bonuses for experienced officers can be as high as $25K.  Local KOIN station had a lengthy series of stories called "Is Portland Over?" because some things are so bad.  The homeless crisis is so bad that the city looks like a developing country in some locations, and in others it looks like lawless favelas have been set up right outside nice neighborhoods (eg, Powell Butte).  Portland has been run by the American Left since the 1950s - that is a fact, which can be looked up online - and the last few years have been disastrous.  There are people who refuse to work downtown.  I have personally spoken with people when interviewing for jobs who wanted to no longer work in Portland because they feared for their safety.  There were no news stories, no online op-eds, none of that, just real people discussing reality on the ground right now.  Precisely contrary to what has been written on this very forum by people who do not know the area, it is left wing protestors who have been primarily responsible for the destruction and decline of Portland.  To be sure, right-wing fools (eg, Proud Boys) have been involved, but the overwhelming amount of violence and destruction has been perpetrated by left-wing perpetrators seeking what they call "justice".  But of course, what I write is wrong and will sway no one and people will continue to believe what they want to believe.  That is the beauty of contemporary politics.  Find your preferred online echo chamber and get comfy.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on June 30, 2022, 04:20:44 PM
Quote from: BasilValentine on June 29, 2022, 12:01:40 PM
On what basis do you claim these people were leftist?
Because they were BLM protests. BLM is leftist.


Quote from: BasilValentine on June 29, 2022, 12:01:40 PM
Do you remember umbrella man breaking the windows of businesses in Portland? He wasn't BLM or antifa, he turned out to be on "the other" side.
I see this person used as an example- yeah, this sort of thing can happen. But keeping the big picture in mind, it doesn't really change anything.



Quote from: BasilValentine on June 30, 2022, 07:29:24 AM
As for the bold portion: There is extensive and pervasive violence against blacks. It doesn't always end with murder.   
Against everyone. And sometimes aggressive treatment is needed, sometimes it really isn't and ends in disaster. People here in the US can be quite crazy, and cops know this.




Quote from: Spotted Horses on June 30, 2022, 08:54:07 AM
but on the fact that U.S. society does not value black people, which does not allow them the same access to educational, economic or social resources.
Yeah, this isn't a fact. This is the 2020's, not the 1950's.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on June 30, 2022, 04:21:12 PM
Quote from: Todd on June 30, 2022, 04:11:03 PM
  But of course, what I write is wrong and will sway no one and people will continue to believe what they want to believe.  That is the beauty of contemporary politics.  Find your preferred online echo chamber and get comfy.

I don't know about the history of Portland, but wrt the BLM riots I return to this and ask if you would contradict it:


Quote from: SimonNZ on June 29, 2022, 01:17:55 PM

And as I've said before on this thread, I blame Trump further for not speaking in empathy with the black community or calling for police reform or doing anything at all to defuse the situation at any point along the way, but rather did everything he could to stoke bad feeling and outrage and division to the point of explosion, because it plays better with the maga base to support bad cops and paint blacks as thugs.


Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on June 30, 2022, 04:24:32 PM
Quote from: Todd on June 30, 2022, 04:11:03 PM
This will almost certainly be deleted, but that is OK.  I also rely on local first-hand accounts when available.  One of my relatives was a Multnomah County Sheriff's deputy during the Portland riots.  He was called on to protect public buildings in Portland.  That included the jail, which rioters - left wing rioters - attempted to burn down.  He was there.  He heard what they were yelling, he saw the signs they carried.  He had to avoid projectiles.  Some on fire.  There were inmates inside the jail as well as officers, it should be noted.  Lives were on the line.  For real.  It was not a game.  It was not an online forum.  People faced the real risk of dying.  But people will believe what they want, as filtered through the internet.
The main one I remember was, weren't they trying to burn down the Portland courthouse for like a month? Or am I misremembering?
(didn't know about the jail btw)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on June 30, 2022, 04:34:54 PM
Quote from: greg on June 30, 2022, 04:24:32 PM
The main one I remember was, weren't they trying to burn down the Portland courthouse for like a month? Or am I misremembering?
(didn't know about the jail btw)

That was the federal courthouse in Downtown Portland, which gave rise to the stupid decision by the Trump Administration to use unidentified federal agents to apprehend suspected perpetrators.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on June 30, 2022, 04:48:11 PM
Quote from: Todd on June 30, 2022, 04:11:03 PM
This will almost certainly be deleted, but that is OK.  I also rely on local first-hand accounts when available.  One of my relatives was a Multnomah County Sheriff's deputy during the Portland riots.  He was called on to protect public buildings in Portland.  That included the jail, which rioters - left wing rioters - attempted to burn down.  He was there.  He heard what they were yelling, he saw the signs they carried.  He had to avoid projectiles.  Some on fire.  There were inmates inside the jail as well as officers, it should be noted.  Lives were on the line.  For real.  It was not a game.  It was not an online forum.  People faced the real risk of dying.  But people will believe what they want, as filtered through the internet.

My relative retired from the Sheriff's Office very soon afterward, as did a large number of deputies and Portland police officers.  The two agencies cannot fill the open slots.  The City of Portland just announced - as in this week - a new bonus program in a desperate attempt to fill over one hundred open positions.  Signing bonuses for experienced officers can be as high as $25K.  Local KOIN station had a lengthy series of stories called "Is Portland Over?" because some things are so bad.  The homeless crisis is so bad that the city looks like a developing country in some locations, and in others it looks like lawless favelas have been set up right outside nice neighborhoods (eg, Powell Butte).  Portland has been run by the American Left since the 1950s - that is a fact, which can be looked up online - and the last few years have been disastrous.  There are people who refuse to work downtown.  I have personally spoken with people when interviewing for jobs who wanted to no longer work in Portland because they feared for their safety.  There were no news stories, no online op-eds, none of that, just real people discussing reality on the ground right now.  Precisely contrary to what has been written on this very forum by people who do not know the area, it is left wing protestors who have been primarily responsible for the destruction and decline of Portland.  To be sure, right-wing fools (eg, Proud Boys) have been involved, but the overwhelming amount of violence and destruction has been perpetrated by left-wing perpetrators seeking what they call "justice".  But of course, what I write is wrong and will sway no one and people will continue to believe what they want to believe.  That is the beauty of contemporary politics.  Find your preferred online echo chamber and get comfy.

Portland's issues are unique to itself and in no way represent the nation as a whole. Nationwide, there were pockets of heavy violence, but the vast majority of demonstrations were distinctly nonviolent.

It is clearly obvious from what you have written here that Portland's issues far predate BLM, or most of the Left of today, for that matter. Overall, well...  :-\

8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on June 30, 2022, 06:28:40 PM
Quote from: greg on June 30, 2022, 04:20:44 PM
Because they were BLM protests. BLM is leftist.

You seem unaware of how, if this claim is true, it utterly damns the right.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on June 30, 2022, 09:54:54 PM
Quote from: Madiel on June 30, 2022, 06:28:40 PM
You seem unaware of how, if this claim is true, it utterly damns the right.

Yes.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on June 30, 2022, 11:47:33 PM
Quote from: Todd on June 30, 2022, 04:11:03 PM
This will almost certainly be deleted, but that is OK.  I also rely on local first-hand accounts when available.  One of my relatives was a Multnomah County Sheriff's deputy during the Portland riots.  He was called on to protect public buildings in Portland.  That included the jail, which rioters - left wing rioters - attempted to burn down.  He was there.  He heard what they were yelling, he saw the signs they carried.  He had to avoid projectiles.  Some on fire.  There were inmates inside the jail as well as officers, it should be noted.  Lives were on the line.  For real.  It was not a game.  It was not an online forum.  People faced the real risk of dying.  But people will believe what they want, as filtered through the internet.

My relative retired from the Sheriff's Office very soon afterward, as did a large number of deputies and Portland police officers.  The two agencies cannot fill the open slots.  The City of Portland just announced - as in this week - a new bonus program in a desperate attempt to fill over one hundred open positions.  Signing bonuses for experienced officers can be as high as $25K.  Local KOIN station had a lengthy series of stories called "Is Portland Over?" because some things are so bad.  The homeless crisis is so bad that the city looks like a developing country in some locations, and in others it looks like lawless favelas have been set up right outside nice neighborhoods (eg, Powell Butte).  Portland has been run by the American Left since the 1950s - that is a fact, which can be looked up online - and the last few years have been disastrous.  There are people who refuse to work downtown.  I have personally spoken with people when interviewing for jobs who wanted to no longer work in Portland because they feared for their safety.  There were no news stories, no online op-eds, none of that, just real people discussing reality on the ground right now.  Precisely contrary to what has been written on this very forum by people who do not know the area, it is left wing protestors who have been primarily responsible for the destruction and decline of Portland.  To be sure, right-wing fools (eg, Proud Boys) have been involved, but the overwhelming amount of violence and destruction has been perpetrated by left-wing perpetrators seeking what they call "justice".  But of course, what I write is wrong and will sway no one and people will continue to believe what they want to believe.  That is the beauty of contemporary politics.  Find your preferred online echo chamber and get comfy.
I should have mentioned that I lived in Portland for several years before moving out of the country. I still know people there (these are the people who most defend rioting and extreme positions like "defund the police"). Anybody who has spent any time in Portland knows that it's a left-wing city. I attended PSU.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on July 01, 2022, 12:00:04 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on June 29, 2022, 01:17:55 PM
This.

And as I've said before on this thread, I blame Trump further for not speaking in empathy with the black community or calling for police reform or doing anything at all to defuse the situation at any point along the way, but rather did everything he could to stoke bad feeling and outrage and division to the point of explosion, because it plays better with the maga base to support bad cops and paint blacks as thugs.
This seems weak to me. Are we children? Yes, trumb is an idiot. 24/7. But because of bad feelings people went haywire ? I rather think the left blew its opportunities and lost its focus on real issues. Genocide of black people, to quote Naomi Osaka, is absurd. What's not absurd is real racism in policing, in some locations, a complicated issue to be sure (not to be solved with defunding or abolishing), warehousing of a whole generation of African Americans (also a complex issue), and overall poverty, education, healthcare, union representation, affecting lots of middle class and poor people of all backgrounds. The left is caught up in absurdities. It can't live on "trump is bad."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on July 01, 2022, 02:40:06 AM
Quote from: greg on June 30, 2022, 04:20:44 PM
Because they were BLM protests. BLM is leftist.

Yeah, because a lot of people on the right have morally questionable ideas such as all people shouldn't be equal.

In the US white people in general have been in power, especially white men. Equal opportunities and rights for everyone, what the left advocates, mean these people will lose some of that power when it gets spread over the whole population. All of this is about class war between the 99 % and the 1 %, but since the 1 % has actually lost this war ideologically long ago, they need to change the game: They need the 99 % divided so that it leaves the 1 % alone free to keep robbing them blind. MAGA, Proud Boys, Antifa, BLM,... all of this is about divided 99 %.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on July 01, 2022, 03:02:29 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on July 01, 2022, 02:40:06 AM
Yeah, because a lot of people on the right have morally questionable ideas such as all people shouldn't be equal.

In the US white people in general have been in power, especially white men. Equal opportunities and rights for everyone, what the left advocates, mean these people will lose some of that power when it gets spread over the whole population. All of this is about class war between the 99 % and the 1 %, but since the 1 % has actually lost this war ideologically long ago, they need to change the game: They need the 99 % divided so that it leaves the 1 % alone free to keep robbing them blind. MAGA, Proud Boys, Antifa, BLM,... all of this is about divided 99 %.
The second part of this makes some sense. The first part is questionable depending on what kinds of solutions are being proposed to what kinds of specific problems. The stuff that's been fed to the younger generation that's come out of the academy: equity and rigging outcomes, post modern gender nonsense, ideologies of oppression and outrage, identitarianism - this IS going to sink the left. It is going to keep people in grievance mode and divided. This is what's gotten trumpf elected and it's what will re-elect him or elect DeSantis. DeSantis is coming up. Who's gonna stop him?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 01, 2022, 03:11:57 AM
Quote from: milk on July 01, 2022, 03:02:29 AM
The second part of this makes some sense. The first part is questionable depending on what kinds of solutions are being proposed to what kinds of specific problems. The stuff that's been fed to the younger generation that's come out of the academy: equity and rigging outcomes, post modern gender nonsense, ideologies of oppression and outrage, identitarianism - this IS going to sink the left. It is going to keep people in grievance mode and divided. This is what's gotten trumpf elected and it's what will re-elect him or elect DeSantis. DeSantis is coming up. Who's gonna stop him?

Rigging outcomes?

There's a profound reluctance in some quarters to understand that the benefits of many many previous generations of rigging outcomes still persist. Formal equality from a particular point in time doesn't produce satisfactory outcomes if nothing is done to address what happened before.

African-Americans are still dealing with the consequences of policies like redlining. Black entrepeneurs are still dealing with the fact that they can't tap into the wealth resources of family the way that a lot of white entrepeneurs can, because their families didn't get to accumulate wealth resources. Sure, this rich white family doesn't own slaves now, but the wealth they obtained through owning slaves set them up nicely, and they got to keep it.

The reluctance extends to even banning talking about these things.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on July 01, 2022, 03:26:26 AM
Quote from: milk on July 01, 2022, 03:02:29 AM
The second part of this makes some sense. The first part is questionable depending on what kinds of solutions are being proposed to what kinds of specific problems. The stuff that's been fed to the younger generation that's come out of the academy: equity and rigging outcomes, post modern gender nonsense, ideologies of oppression and outrage, identitarianism - this IS going to sink the left. It is going to keep people in grievance mode and divided. This is what's gotten trumpf elected and it's what will re-elect him or elect DeSantis. DeSantis is coming up. Who's gonna stop him?

If anyone is guilty of rigging the outcomes it is the rich white men and in the US this may indeed sink the left and the country becomes a theoratic dictatorship (Ron DeSantis, who is just as bad as Trump, but smarter, might be the first dictator - Joe Rogan seems to works hard for this result). Good luck for Americans the little freedoms they had, but I am very pessimistic after all these years. Roe v. Wade gone. EPA gone. Next gay marriage and sodomy laws... I doesn't look good for the 99 %.  :-\
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 01, 2022, 03:39:42 AM
The EPA is not gone.

I've already seen some fundamental misunderstanding of the EPA case. It is not a case about the interpretation of the constitution. It's about the regulation-making powers the EPA has under laws passed by Congress. If Congress passes different laws it can give the EPA different powers.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on July 01, 2022, 03:46:15 AM
Quote from: Madiel on July 01, 2022, 03:39:42 AM
The EPA is not gone.

I've already seen some fundamental misunderstanding of the EPA case. It is not a case about the interpretation of the constitution. It's about the regulation-making powers the EPA has under laws passed by Congress. If Congress passes different laws it can give the EPA different powers.

EPA is gone in the sense that it is handcuffed. It can't do what it is supposed to do. As for the Congress passing laws to give EPA more power, good luck with that!   :-\
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 01, 2022, 03:52:20 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on July 01, 2022, 03:46:15 AM
EPA is gone in the sense that it is handcuffed. It can't do what it is supposed to do. As for the Congress passing laws to give EPA more power, good luck with that!   :-\

Who decides what the EPA is "supposed to do"?

Answer: it's Congress. And that's the point. It's basic separation of powers stuff. Governments don't write laws, legislatures do. Government agencies only get regulation-making powers to the extent that legislatures provide them.

If Congress isn't giving the EPA the right kind of powers, the solution is to elect a different Congress. And yes, the rigging of the American electoral system is a whole other issue. But getting away from basic constitutional theory about who actually gets to make laws versus who is supposed to administer them is not a good solution to that.

I mean, I've no idea whether I agree with the Supreme Court's interpretation of the Clean Air Act or not. But if the current Clean Air Act is inadequate, it's the job of Congress to change it, not the job of the EPA.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on July 01, 2022, 06:08:31 AM
Quote from: Madiel on June 30, 2022, 06:28:40 PM
You seem unaware of how, if this claim is true, it utterly damns the right.

Greg unironically asserted that the right is racist.  He is not exactly a good spokesman for his own political views! >:D

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on July 01, 2022, 06:38:24 AM
Quote from: Madiel on July 01, 2022, 03:52:20 AM
Who decides what the EPA is "supposed to do"?

Answer: it's Congress. And that's the point. It's basic separation of powers stuff. Governments don't write laws, legislatures do. Government agencies only get regulation-making powers to the extent that legislatures provide them.

If Congress isn't giving the EPA the right kind of powers, the solution is to elect a different Congress. And yes, the rigging of the American electoral system is a whole other issue. But getting away from basic constitutional theory about who actually gets to make laws versus who is supposed to administer them is not a good solution to that.

I mean, I've no idea whether I agree with the Supreme Court's interpretation of the Clean Air Act or not. But if the current Clean Air Act is inadequate, it's the job of Congress to change it, not the job of the EPA.

I wonder how detail laws have to be in the USA?  In Canada most laws passed by Parliament are purposely vague in detail, and implicitly or explicitly allow Cabinet to provide details and regulations that flesh out the law;  these formal Cabinet decisions are referred to as "Orders-in-Council".

Thus, for example, in 2020 Cabinet, by an Order-in-Council, declared over 1500 assault-style rifle models retroactively banned.  This ban is consistent with existing legislation but not detailed in it.

I wonder if there is a parallel in US practice?  It seems to me that Presidential "Executive Orders" are roughly the same idea as Orders-in-Council".  On that basis I wonder if, or to what extent, the powers of the EPA might be reinforced by Executive Orders consistent with the Clean Air Act?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on July 01, 2022, 07:38:23 AM
 
Quote from: greg on June 30, 2022, 04:20:44 PM
Because they were BLM protests. BLM is leftist.

Most BLM protesters are not affiliated with any organized group. In and of itself, protesting systemic institutional racism and the police violence fueled by it says nothing about ones political views. It only indicates that one has a grasp of reality and statistics. Given that most of the white supremacists, replacement theory morons, overt racists, and undereducated deplorables who currently support Trump possess neither of these attributes inevitably skews the protester population.  ;D
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on July 01, 2022, 08:34:54 AM
Quote from: Madiel on July 01, 2022, 03:52:20 AM
Who decides what the EPA is "supposed to do"?

Experts on environmental issues should "decide" what EPA "is supposed to do."

Quote from: Madiel on July 01, 2022, 03:52:20 AMAnswer: it's Congress. And that's the point. It's basic separation of powers stuff. Governments don't write laws, legislatures do. Government agencies only get regulation-making powers to the extent that legislatures provide them.

The Congress should listen to the experts. That's were the problems start. A large portion of the Congress is bribed to not listen to the experts.

Quote from: Madiel on July 01, 2022, 03:52:20 AMIf Congress isn't giving the EPA the right kind of powers, the solution is to elect a different Congress. And yes, the rigging of the American electoral system is a whole other issue. But getting away from basic constitutional theory about who actually gets to make laws versus who is supposed to administer them is not a good solution to that.

The Congress is reluctant to give a lot of power to the EPA, because those who bribed them want a handcuffed EPA or no EPA at all. Yes, a different non-bribe-taking Congress should be elected, but this is much easier to say than do and the same bribed hacks get re-elected again and again... ...the real solution is to make a new amendment to take money out of politics, but this is also near impossible. The rigged electoral system is just one layer of this. The whole country is rigged for the richest 1 %.

Quote from: Madiel on July 01, 2022, 03:52:20 AMI mean, I've no idea whether I agree with the Supreme Court's interpretation of the Clean Air Act or not. But if the current Clean Air Act is inadequate, it's the job of Congress to change it, not the job of the EPA.

The Congress is not doing the job it's supposed to do for reasons mentioned above. So, nobody is doing the job and that's REALLY BAD. The Supreme Court is supposed to monitor the constitutionality of laws, but this EPA thing is not about that. It is about doing politics by handcuffing EPA to serve those who own the current Supreme Court: The richest 1 % and evangelical supporters of theocracy. Americans are f**cked big time, because the Dems are letting all of this happen despite of being in power.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on July 01, 2022, 08:48:17 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on July 01, 2022, 06:38:24 AM
I wonder how detail laws have to be in the USA?  In Canada most laws passed by Parliament are purposely vague in detail, and implicitly or explicitly allow Cabinet to provide details and regulations that flesh out the law;  these formal Cabinet decisions are referred to as "Orders-in-Council".

Thus, for example, in 2020 Cabinet, by an Order-in-Council, declared over 1500 assault-style rifle models retroactively banned.  This ban is consistent with existing legislation but not detailed in it.

I wonder if there is a parallel in US practice?  It seems to me that Presidential "Executive Orders" are roughly the same idea as Orders-in-Council".  On that basis I wonder if, or to what extent, the powers of the EPA might be reinforced by Executive Orders consistent with the Clean Air Act?

That's the crux of the problem right there. For decades, USA practice was similar: Congress passed very general laws and left the agencies and White House to work out the details. The American Right has been working to roll that back as much as possible. This new SCOTUS decision is in line with that, although it seems to have not gone all the way.
The legal/constitutional argument is whether the agencies are legislating instead of Congress, and not just acting as deputies/authorized agents of Congress.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on July 01, 2022, 08:50:28 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on July 01, 2022, 08:34:54 AM
Experts on environmental issues should "decide" what EPA "is supposed to do."

The Congress should listen to the experts. That's were the problems start. A large portion of the Congress is bribed to not listen to the experts.

The Congress is reluctant to give a lot of power to the EPA, because those who bribed them want a handcuffed EPA or no EPA at all. Yes, a different non-bribe-taking Congress should be elected, but this is much easier to say than do and the same bribed hacks get re-elected again and again... ...the real solution is to make a new amendment to take money out of politics, but this is also near impossible. The rigged electoral system is just one layer of this. The whole country is rigged for the richest 1 %.

The Congress is not doing the job it's supposed to do for reasons mentioned above. So, nobody is doing the job and that's REALLY BAD. The Supreme Court is supposed to monitor the constitutionality of laws, but this EPA thing is not about that. It is about doing politics by handcuffing EPA to serve those who own the current Supreme Court: The richest 1 % and evangelical supporters of theocracy. Americans are f**cked big time, because the Dems are letting all of this happen despite of being in power.

It's impossible to take money out of politics. Banning it merely means the money would be there but hidden from public view.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on July 01, 2022, 08:55:59 AM
Quote from: JBS on July 01, 2022, 08:50:28 AM
It's impossible to take money out of politics. Banning it merely means the money would be there but hidden from public view.

That's not the reason why it is impossible. Would you end a system you benefit from yourself?

Bribery is a crime in real democratic countries. You go to prison for it. Real democracy is impossible if there is money in politics. Anyone with two brain cells should understand that.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on July 01, 2022, 09:04:37 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on July 01, 2022, 08:55:59 AM
That's not the reason why it is impossible. Would you end a system you benefit from yourself?

Bribery is a crime in real democratic countries. You go to prison for it. Real democracy is impossible if there is money in politics. Anyone with two brain cells should understand that.

So you're saying real democracy is impossible.

People donating money to AOC's re-election campaign is money in politics.

Look, if I have a business or a large investment, and the government is making a decision or issuing a policy, I'm going to do whatever I can to influence the result in my favor.

That's universal human nature, regardless of political system.

You can keep it under wraps and pretend it's not there, or you can make sure it happens openly so people can see what you're doing. To the degree the US has a consistent approach to this, the US goes for the second option.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on July 01, 2022, 09:31:15 AM
Quote from: JBS on July 01, 2022, 09:04:37 AM
So you're saying real democracy is impossible.

People donating money to AOC's re-election campaign is money in politics.

Look, if I have a business or a large investment, and the government is making a decision or issuing a policy, I'm going to do whatever I can to influence the result in my favor.

That's universal human nature, regardless of political system.

You can keep it under wraps and pretend it's not there, or you can make sure it happens openly so people can see what you're doing. To the degree the US has a consistent approach to this, the US goes for the second option.

There shouldn't be a need to donate money to AOC who needs the money only to compete against corporations backed candidates.

If the rich buy the elections and politics it is not democracy. It is oligarchy.

One solution it that the government grands everyone say $20 to donate to whoever they want. That way everyone can donate the exact same amount and the outcome can be considered democratic.

AOC at least gets the donations from her constituents unlike many other politicians

Anyway, I spent enough time in this thread. I am out.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Jo498 on July 01, 2022, 09:49:49 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on July 01, 2022, 08:34:54 AM
Experts on environmental issues should "decide" what EPA "is supposed to do."

The Congress should listen to the experts. That's were the problems start. A large portion of the Congress is bribed to not listen to the experts.
If the last 2.5 years with "experts" helping with both the greatest haul in history that made Harry Lime's watered peniciline coup look like a choirboy's prank and restrictions of liberties until now unknown in "democracies" have not cured your belief and trust in "experts" you are probably not curable.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on July 01, 2022, 09:52:18 AM
Quote from: JBS on July 01, 2022, 09:04:37 AM
So you're saying real democracy is impossible.

People donating money to AOC's re-election campaign is money in politics.

Look, if I have a business or a large investment, and the government is making a decision or issuing a policy, I'm going to do whatever I can to influence the result in my favor.

That's universal human nature, regardless of political system.

You can keep it under wraps and pretend it's not there, or you can make sure it happens openly so people can see what you're doing. To the degree the US has a consistent approach to this, the US goes for the second option.

I agree that there will and must be money in politics.  The question is whether there will be so much and -- here I agree with you in the concept -- the sources of the money must be as transparent as can be made to be.

The issue for the USA is that it has no real limits on spending, (on candidates, parties, or "single issues" that relate to candidates or parties), nor does it have sufficient traceability of donations.

It false dichotomy to imply that it's unlimited spending versus convert spending -- especially when much of the unlimited spending is already convert.  :(
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 01, 2022, 02:31:39 PM
Quote from: JBS on July 01, 2022, 08:48:17 AM
That's the crux of the problem right there. For decades, USA practice was similar: Congress passed very general laws and left the agencies and White House to work out the details. The American Right has been working to roll that back as much as possible. This new SCOTUS decision is in line with that, although it seems to have not gone all the way.
The legal/constitutional argument is whether the agencies are legislating instead of Congress, and not just acting as deputies/authorized agents of Congress.

Don't get me wrong, from my tradition I see significant problems with American law making (you don't tend to have professional legislative drafters for one thing, although that's been slowly changing). But the basic legal/constitutional question is sound. Agencies should only be making rules in the areas that Congress has allowed.

Those areas can in theory be quite broad. But views might differ about how clear Congress has to be about what it's allowing. And I fear your Congress often mumbles.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on July 01, 2022, 02:53:04 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on July 01, 2022, 03:26:26 AM
If anyone is guilty of rigging the outcomes it is the rich white men and in the US this may indeed sink the left and the country becomes a theoratic dictatorship (Ron DeSantis, who is just as bad as Trump, but smarter, might be the first dictator - Joe Rogan seems to works hard for this result). Good luck for Americans the little freedoms they had, but I am very pessimistic after all these years. Roe v. Wade gone. EPA gone. Next gay marriage and sodomy laws... I doesn't look good for the 99 %.  :-\
The patriarchy huh. Im not seeing. Not in 2022. The problem is equality of opportunity for everyone. Yes. The 99%. That's all kinds of people.

And this:
'Condemning everyone alive': outrage at US supreme court climate ruling

Limiting the Environmental Protection Agency at a time when fossil fuel emissions need to be curbed is 'devastating'
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2022/jun/30/supreme-court-ruling-epa-west-virginia-climate-experts-activists-lawyers
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on July 01, 2022, 06:04:25 PM
Quote from: 71 dB on July 01, 2022, 02:40:06 AM
Yeah, because a lot of people on the right have morally questionable ideas such as all people shouldn't be equal.

In the US white people in general have been in power, especially white men. Equal opportunities and rights for everyone, what the left advocates, mean these people will lose some of that power when it gets spread over the whole population. All of this is about class war between the 99 % and the 1 %, but since the 1 % has actually lost this war ideologically long ago, they need to change the game: They need the 99 % divided so that it leaves the 1 % alone free to keep robbing them blind. MAGA, Proud Boys, Antifa, BLM,... all of this is about divided 99 %.
The whole overfocus on white men being so bad is the distraction itself. Millions and millions of white men that are not in the 1%, that are working poor. Focusing on the demographic of 1% of the population is entirely pointless when power is so lopsided. 



Quote from: 71 dB on July 01, 2022, 02:40:06 AM
Yeah, because a lot of people on the right have morally questionable ideas such as all people shouldn't be equal.
You could be referring to something I'm not aware of.
But I'm aware of equal opportunity vs. equity.
Equity is a leftist-only position. Equal opportunity is a left-wing, centrist, and right-wing position. But I'm sure far-right has some weird and retarded beliefs.
Equity is not a position I support. You want someone to save you from a burning building, but isn't strong enough to move the equipment needed? (female diversity hire) Oh well, guess you'll just die.
Equal opportunity = a woman who has a passion for firefighting builds up strength to do the job correctly, and saves you. Was never rejected for the job due to gender. Excellent.



Quote from: Madiel on June 30, 2022, 06:28:40 PM
You seem unaware of how, if this claim is true, it utterly damns the right.
What do you mean? Are you implying that non-BLM is racist?
The ones who stand separate from, or opposed to, BLM, are the All Lives Matter people... which "all lives" includes black people.
If there is some group that is in support of black people unjustly treated by cops, then I've never heard of them. Thankfully, too. That would be upsetting.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: JBS on July 01, 2022, 06:14:39 PM
1) It's easier for a poor white person to get out of poverty than a poor non-white.
There's so much data on how whites have cultural and social advantages not available to non-whites, that it's not debatable.
2) All Lives Matter is merely a slogan meant to evade the truth that underlies BLM: police brutality affects Blacks more than anyone else

There's no reason for you not to know this already, Greg.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 01, 2022, 06:22:57 PM
All Lives Matter is best illustrated by a cartoon I saw where someone holding a hose is declaring that all houses matter when only one of the houses is on fire.

Black Lives Matter is not claiming, and has never claimed, that non-black lives don't matter. We say that black lives matter because the value of white lives was never in question in the first place.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on July 01, 2022, 08:25:18 PM
Quote from: JBS on July 01, 2022, 06:14:39 PM
1) It's easier for a poor white person to get out of poverty than a poor non-white.
There's so much data on how whites have cultural and social advantages not available to non-whites, that it's not debatable.
2) All Lives Matter is merely a slogan meant to evade the truth that underlies BLM: police brutality affects Blacks more than anyone else

There's no reason for you not to know this already, Greg.
This is clearly not true. Perhaps you meant to say that black people born in the U.S. have a more difficult time. That sounds right.

In that case, the question is: what to do about it? I guess I used to believe in the left-wing answers all down the line. Now I'm not so sure. There are so many ways to debate this question based on a lot of nuanced research and nobody agrees, certainly not all people even within whichever ethnic group or academic field you ask.

Sure, Ibrahim Kendi and Al Sharpton are going to give you a pretty clear answer going in one direction. Cornell West as well has been in dialogue with Critical Post-Marxists (and, tangentially, PoMo gender theorists like Judith Butler) for years and now it's filtered down to the youngins at WaPo and the Grey Lady and everywhere else. I don't mean West alone, I mean the generation of theorists who kept at it, the Angela Davis-es and people like Bell Hooks, who preached intersectionality, critical theories, revolutionary ideologies and post-Marxist feminism. There's your whiteness theories and identitarianisms. There's today's cooked-up woke-ism in the syringe of social media. But ask Glenn Loury and John McWhorter and Roland Fryer, those types, and you get a different answer.

There is research, for example, that says that giving people the sense that they are in control of their futures produces better results than giving people the sense that they are oppressed victims. I'm not saying it's necessarily true. I don't know. I do know that American cities have failed and I think it can't possibly be blamed only on the right or on systematic racism. I do think the horrible history of racism IS part of the problem. It may be the key ingredient exactly because of what your post gets wrong: other non-white groups have done just fine and even Nigerian immigrants do pretty well from what I understand. I think this woke stuff is going to tank the Dems. It's going to make things worse. For national politics, you simply can't hope to bring people together on any level, you can't hope to govern, based on grievance. Not unless you want another Trump which is what we might get anyway. DeSantis looks to be another trump.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on July 01, 2022, 10:53:23 PM
Quote from: greg on July 01, 2022, 06:04:25 PM
You want someone to save you from a burning building, but isn't strong enough to move the equipment needed? (female diversity hire) Oh well, guess you'll just die.


I don't live in burning buildings, and neither do most people.
It's a complete imbecile example, skewed towards: in life you need muscles.
Check out jobless factory workers > opioid crisis.
We're in the 21st century. Much of the economy requires social and brain skills rather than physical power.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on July 02, 2022, 12:48:19 AM
Quote from: Herman on July 01, 2022, 10:53:23 PM
I don't live in burning buildings, and neither do most people.
It's a complete imbecile example, skewed towards: in life you need muscles.
Check out jobless factory workers > opioid crisis.
We're in the 21st century. Much of the economy requires social and brain skills rather than physical power.
This is really totally missing the point. Maybe one should ask you what you think his point was exactly? I'm not pointing a finger at you. It's a good idea to just discuss these things in a friendly way. I'm just saying that you're not really steel-manning his argument. There are differences across groups. It's a very touchy subject for everyone. Me too. I really do not enjoy wading into such an area. I might suggest you watch some of Glenn Loury and John McWhorter's discussions on these issues. They're on YouTube. I'm not saying this because I think they'll change your mind but because they're calm and reasonable and can talk to all kinds of people, even those who don't like what they're saying.
Anyway, I am not making the point that there are any indelible differences in these groups of people but I also no longer believe equity and quotas is always the right solution. It may be OK in some circumstances based on what an particular organization is doing. But I think it's counterproductive as a broad idea. And it probably produces lots of unintended consequences. It's tough to discuss such things. I found it much easier walking around as a person who just believed these things "as gospel." What do I want out of an orchestra? I don't care what it looks like. I want it to sound good. I'm for auditions behind a curtain. There are many reasons, not least of which is the dignity of all the people, all kinds of people, who dedicate themselves to it. I'm open to reasons why I should change my mind. I wish I were able to believe and accept what the woke people are saying because it probably makes life easier. You can really feel safe in numbers and sleep well knowing you're 100% right.
Whatever solutions we find to injustice it should start with love. Love for all humanity and this world. When I look at PoMo and post-Marxist critical theories, I wonder why I found them exciting. I think it's because it's cool when you're young to feel like you've got these keys for unlocking why the world is so sinister. It gives one a kind of authority over everything (and you don't even have to know math or science much to do it).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on July 02, 2022, 01:27:33 AM
Quote from: milk on July 01, 2022, 08:25:18 PM
This is clearly not true. Perhaps you meant to say that black people born in the U.S. have a more difficult time. That sounds right.
What do you mean by this? Of course a poor black person can be successful in the USA, say by becoming a very popular hip hopper, but whites can succeed in this way too and statistically even more. However, if you were born without a mega-talent to something, whites have an cultural advantage (this varies state to state I guess). Born in the US? Huh? Were else?

Quote from: milk on July 01, 2022, 08:25:18 PMIn that case, the question is: what to do about it? I guess I used to believe in the left-wing answers all down the line. Now I'm not so sure.

Why are you not sure anymore? What happened? I saw somewhere an estimate, that there are 50.000 people living in the US advocating communism. Those people will never have any power in the country. The furthest left people in power in the US are people like Bernie Sanders and AOC. They are far from communist. They are not even socialists, even if Bernie mistakenly calls himself a democratic socialist, maybe because in the US these labels are so poorly known. Bernie and AOC are social democrats, left end capitalists who advocate regulated capitalism to hinder the crony aspects of capitalism that has ruined the lives of millions of Americans. They advocate these ideas not to turn the country into Venezuela or Cuba, but because they see the evidence of how well social democracy works in other countries while recognising the problems of US style crony capitalism for the poor & socialism for the rich oligarchy.

This is about economic ideas however. Maybe you are talking about social ideas instead? Maybe you are against the woke-culture on the left? Just know that many on the left are NOT into wokeness. It can get really silly when you demand that the next actor of Superman should be a trans amputee. I don't like wokeness at all and I am a lefty as everyone knows

That is enough...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on July 02, 2022, 03:58:58 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on July 02, 2022, 01:27:33 AM
Why are you not sure anymore? What happened? I saw somewhere an estimate, that there are 50.000 people living in the US advocating communism. Those people will never have any power in the country. The furthest left people in power in the US are people like Bernie Sanders and AOC. They are far from communist. They are not even socialists, even if Bernie mistakenly calls himself a democratic socialist, maybe because in the US these labels are so poorly known. Bernie and AOC are social democrats, left end capitalists who advocate regulated capitalism to hinder the crony aspects of capitalism that has ruined the lives of millions of Americans. They advocate these ideas not to turn the country into Venezuela or Cuba, but because they see the evidence of how well social democracy works in other countries while recognising the problems of US style crony capitalism for the poor & socialism for the rich oligarchy.

This is about economic ideas however. Maybe you are talking about social ideas instead? Maybe you are against the woke-culture on the left? Just know that many on the left are NOT into wokeness. It can get really silly when you demand that the next actor of Superman should be a trans amputee. I don't like wokeness at all and I am a lefty as everyone knows

It can't be stated too strongly that there IS NO "far-Left" political party or constituency in the USA, at least none with slightest general influence.  As you point out, Sanders and AOC, mild social democrats, are about as far Left as have any sort of voice in the USA.

There is economic conservatism of both the self-interested and ideological varieties.  Then there is social conservatism that runs a broad spectrum from rank, violent racism, to mild nostalgia for a past where White Anglo Protestants ruled the roost.

There is no necessary affiliation between economic and social conservatism but the two converge in the Republican Party which is thus bifurcated.  It's economic conservatives, mostly of the self-interested variety, who provide the stupendous volumes of cash that drive Republican campaigns but it is the social conservatives who supply the actual voters.  It is a marriage of convenience.

A big part of what facilitates this "marriage" is the almost unique to America myth of  "liberty" and "rugged individualism", (hence anti-progressivism), that is a pillar of Americans' particular variety of social conservatism.  This myth is artfully exploited by the self-interested Rich.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on July 02, 2022, 05:16:13 AM
Quote from: 71 dB on July 02, 2022, 01:27:33 AM
What do you mean by this?
The original idea was about meritocracy vs. guaranteeing equality of outcomes. That was Greg's point that was being dismissed. If you need a brain surgeon, then you want one that is in the job because of merit only. Of course everyone has the potential to do it, no matter their sex or ethnicity. But fixing disparities by quotas (equity) is mostly a bad idea in many ways and for many reasons. This kind of social engineering of the left is part of a whole program that seems anti-liberal. I think that it's not only bound to fail, it will damage the left's future prospects. Trump was a warning and one that's been unheeded.
Quote from: Fëanor on July 02, 2022, 03:58:58 AM
It can't be stated too strongly that there IS NO "far-Left" political party or constituency in the USA, at least none with slightest general influence.  As you point out, Sanders and AOC, mild social democrats, are about as far Left as have any sort of voice in the USA.

There is economic conservatism of both the self-interested and ideological varieties.  Then there is social conservatism that runs a broad spectrum from rank, violent racism, to mild nostalgia for a past where White Anglo Protestants ruled the roost.

There is no necessary affiliation between economic and social conservatism but the two converge in the Republican Party which is thus bifurcated.  It's economic conservatives, mostly of the self-interested variety, who provide the stupendous volumes of cash that drive Republican campaigns but it is the social conservatives who supply the actual voters.  It is a marriage of convenience.

A big part of what facilitates this "marriage" is the almost unique to America myth of  "liberty" and "rugged individualism", (hence anti-progressivism), that is a pillar of Americans' particular variety of social conservatism.  This myth is artfully exploited by the self-interested Rich.

yeah, the left just gives the working class away. If it's dumb to be that kind of bumpkin you're talking about then isn't it just as dumb to let the right grab working class values? Liberty and democracy are both foundations. It's interesting that you kind of spit on liberty and call it conservative and anti-progressive. This is telling.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 02, 2022, 05:19:10 AM
Quote from: milk on July 02, 2022, 05:16:13 AM
If you need a brain surgeon, then you want one that is in the job because of merit only. Of course everyone has the potential to do it, no matter their sex or ethnicity. But fixing disparities by quotas (equity) is mostly a bad idea in many ways and for many reasons.

This is a completely false notion as to what quotas are about. Give me evidence that people getting assisted by quotas do not also have merit.

People other than white males are not getting to become brain surgeons in spite of a lack of ability. People with the ability to become brain surgeons are now getting to become brain surgeons in spite of not being white males.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on July 02, 2022, 05:47:53 AM
Quote from: milk on July 02, 2022, 05:16:13 AM
... This kind of social engineering of the left is part of a whole program that seems anti-liberal. I think that it's not only bound to fail, it will damage the left's future prospects. Trump was a warning and one that's been unheeded. yeah, the left just gives the working class away. If it's dumb to be that kind of bumpkin you're talking about then isn't it just as dumb to let the right grab working class values? Liberty and democracy are both foundations. It's interesting that you kind of spit on liberty and call it conservative and anti-progressive. This is telling.

I recently heard a poli-sci professor draw a distinction between "liberty" and "human rights".  She thus defined 'liberty' as protection from the state in one's personal life;  the 1st Amendment being the prime example.  By contrast 'human rights' as she defined pertains to protections given by the state to individuals.  The US Constitution pretty much neglects human rights.  In fairness, the Left puts more emphasis on human rights than on liberty;  (I don't call that "social engineering" myself).

I'm not against either let me hasten to say.  But in the US in the eyes of many "liberty" is conflated with individualism license, laissez faire, private enterprise, and state non-interference including protecting the human rights of the disadvantaged.

This is the liberal mythology that economic conservatives leverage to pry mainly white, rural, less educated Americans away from progressivism and the Left, (such as it is).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 02, 2022, 06:01:53 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on July 02, 2022, 05:47:53 AM
I recently heard a poli-sci professor draw a distinction between "liberty" and "human rights".  She thus defined 'liberty' as protection from the state in one's personal life;  the 1st Amendment being the prime example.  By contrast 'human rights' as she defined pertains to protections given by the state to individuals.  The US Constitution pretty much neglects human rights.  In fairness, the Left puts more emphasis on human rights than on liberty;  (I don't call that "social engineering" myself).

I'm not against either let me hasten to say.  But in the US in the eyes of many "liberty" is conflated with individualism license, laissez faire, private enterprise, and state non-interference including protecting the human rights of the disadvantaged.

This is the liberal mythology that economic conservatives leverage to pry mainly white, rural, less educated Americans away from progressivism and the Left, (such as it is).
I don't want to comment on politics specifically, but I think that's a little inaccurate. The framers of the US Constitution believed in *inherent* human rights. They never believed that the state confers any right.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on July 02, 2022, 06:06:13 AM
Quote from: Madiel on July 02, 2022, 05:19:10 AM
This is a completely false notion as to what quotas are about. Give me evidence that people getting assisted by quotas do not also have merit.

People other than white males are not getting to become brain surgeons in spite of a lack of ability. People with the ability to become brain surgeons are now getting to become brain surgeons in spite of not being white males.

It is a fact, however, that various US "affirmative action" require that positions, etc., be awarded to "qualified" minority members before equally or even better qualified non-minority persons, (including, say, poor Whites).  Personally I'm against such so-called affirmative action because it is discriminatory.

Also in general I believe the USA, (and some other countries), ought to emphasize mitigating the effects of poverty more than of minority status -- of course minorities will benefit disproportionately which is fair given they are disproportionately poor.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on July 02, 2022, 06:07:43 AM
Quote from: DizzyD on July 02, 2022, 06:01:53 AM
I don't want to comment on politics specifically, but I think that's a little inaccurate. The framers of the US Constitution believed in *inherent* human rights. They never believed that the state confers any right.

... Certainly not to slaves.  (Property rights trump human rights.)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 02, 2022, 06:12:09 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on July 02, 2022, 06:07:43 AM
... Certainly not to slaves.  (Property rights trump human rights.)
No, not at the moment of ratification with slavery still existing, but it did leave the door wide open for the antislavery amendments. That's why there was the compromise counting slaves as 3/5 of a person. The South wanted 5/5 for representation purposes, in which case there might've been slavery in perpetuity. I get a little weary of the "the Constitution says black people are only 3/5 human" trope.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 02, 2022, 06:16:01 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on July 02, 2022, 06:06:13 AM
It is a fact, however, that various US "affirmative action" require that positions, etc., be awarded to "qualified" minority members before equally or even better qualified non-minority persons, (including, say, poor Whites).  Personally I'm against such so-called affirmative action because it is discriminatory.

Also in general I believe the USA, (and some other countries), ought to emphasize mitigating the effects of poverty more than of minority status -- of course minorities will benefit disproportionately which is fair given they are disproportionately poor.

It's not discriminatory in a legal sense. Discrimination involves taking irrelevant considerations into account. That someone is from a group that has been persistently under-represented is a relevant consideration.

You can't have it both ways. Either people from different races are, at a population level, equally likely to have the necessary skills, or white people are inherently better at something and hence that's why more of them are 'better qualified'.

But if race is not really a determiner of the skills, then the skew in who is "better qualified" is a reflection of other advantages. Advantages that you are explicitly refusing to do anything about.

There are 2 main political parties in Australia. One of them, after intense internal fighting, decided to implement quotas for putting women candidates in winnable seats. The other insisted that women would get to equality by merit. The first party has seen the number of females elected steadily increase over a couple of decades. The other has seen the number of females elected not budge.

Isn't it funny how only ONE of those parties consistently found lots of men who were better qualified than women?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on July 02, 2022, 06:18:46 AM
Quote from: Madiel on July 02, 2022, 05:19:10 AM
This is a completely false notion as to what quotas are about.

Multiple posters have no idea how increasing diversity actually works.  They just project what they think is happening.  DEI considerations for hiring are usually done by employing an organization that enhances or broadens the candidate pool.  The search committee then considers the candidates without knowing who responded to the ad and who was headhunted.  They decide on the ideal candidate based on the qualities for the position and the community.  Not based on gender or race.  The process is not as blatantly discriminatory as one might assume.

Many people don't even realize how harmful it is to also constantly accuse a woman or person of color in the work place of being hired to fill a quota and are unqualified for their job.  How would that feel to constantly feel the need to prove yourself knowing that you'll never be accepted?  People at the top are blind to racism and sexism because they don't personally experience it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on July 02, 2022, 06:22:49 AM
Quote from: milk on July 02, 2022, 12:48:19 AM
This is really totally missing the point. Maybe one should ask you what you think his point was exactly?

The point was: paid work equals fire fighting.
Women aren't good fire fighters due to lack of muscle.
Women better stay home.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on July 02, 2022, 06:23:54 AM
Quote from: Madiel on July 02, 2022, 06:16:01 AM
You can't have it both ways. Either people from different races are, at a population level, equally likely to have the necessary skills, or white people are inherently better at something and hence that's why more of them are 'better qualified'.
That is an obvious false dichotomy.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 02, 2022, 06:40:25 AM
Quote from: milk on July 02, 2022, 06:23:54 AM
That is an obvious false dichotomy.

Um, either race inherently affects skill or it doesn't. Please tell me what middle option between Yes and No I've missed out.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on July 02, 2022, 06:42:19 AM
Quote from: Herman on July 02, 2022, 06:22:49 AM
The point was: paid work equals fire fighting.
Women aren't good fire fighters due to lack of muscle.
Women better stay home.
You're messing with me.  :P
Fool me twice. You can't get fooled again!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on July 02, 2022, 06:54:23 AM
Quote from: milk on July 02, 2022, 06:42:19 AM
You're messing with me.  :P
Fool me twice. You can't get fooled again!

Actually I don't think he is.  If that wasn't the point,  then he used totally the wrong words to express what the point is!    :o

🤠😎
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on July 02, 2022, 07:11:31 AM
Quote from: Madiel on July 02, 2022, 06:40:25 AM
Um, either race inherently affects skill or it doesn't. Please tell me what middle option between Yes and No I've missed out.

Here's your quote:

You can't have it both ways. Either people from different races are, at a population level, equally likely to have the necessary skills, or white people are inherently better at something and hence that's why more of them are 'better qualified'.

It could be that poverty, schools, crime, parenting, lack of parenting, cultural forces, leaded paint, social policy, drugs, racism, etc. lead to deficiencies that have nothing to do with anything inherent, if I'm understanding what exactly you mean the word. I came across something somewhere recently about Asian families and how family honor played a big part in how well their children did in academia. I'm not even saying this is a good thing because I'm not teaching my kids that they have to do well in school to honor the family. To me, it's nuts. But I digress.
I think there are a lot of reasons to put the breaks on this fad of Equity (which is a code word for quotas). One reason is that it pits people against each other, and I'm not talking about white kids. Another reason is that it demeans the groups of people it is targeting. Also, it's a bandaid. Instead of fixing the broken education and social systems that are likely the cause of poor academic performances, it just accepts it cannot do better and promotes or admits people who may do better elsewhere.
I wouldn't rule out all affirmative action programs. It seems to have worked in the military, for example. But I worry it's creating an untenable situation in the States.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on July 02, 2022, 07:13:18 AM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on July 02, 2022, 06:54:23 AM
Actually I don't think he is.  If that wasn't the point,  then he used totally the wrong words to express what the point is!    :o

🤠😎

I didn't see Greg's nonsense about firefighters before.  Women started becoming firefighters decades ago.  All firefighters, regardless of gender, must pass the CPAT.

They need to demonstrate the following items, or they are not going into a burning building:

Quote    Rescue drag.
    Forcible entry.
    Carrying heavy equipment.
    Climbing stairs.
    Fire hose operation. (https://work.chron.com/woman-fireman-15474.html)

So Greg's hypothetical has no basis on reality.



Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on July 02, 2022, 07:16:13 AM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on July 02, 2022, 06:54:23 AM
Actually I don't think he is.  If that wasn't the point,  then he used totally the wrong words to express what the point is!    :o

🤠😎
Maybe I'm on a different planet. I thought he was saying that quotas mean promoting people who aren't necessarily qualified. So, there are many fields of medicine in the U.S. right now that are dominated by women. Gastro, pediatrics, OB, etc. one could reach down for men with lower text scores. But just not for treating my kids please.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on July 02, 2022, 07:56:54 AM
Quote from: DavidW on July 02, 2022, 07:13:18 AM
So Greg's hypothetical has no basis in reality.

Of course it doesn't.  ;)

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on July 02, 2022, 08:39:18 AM
     The lack of qualifications is assumed, against the evidence that only the qualified are considered. The assumption is that you can't broaden the outreach without lowering standards.

Quote from: DavidW on July 02, 2022, 07:13:18 AM
I didn't see Greg's nonsense about firefighters before.  Women started becoming firefighters decades ago.  All firefighters, regardless of gender, must pass the CPAT.

They need to demonstrate the following items, or they are not going into a burning building:

So Greg's hypothetical has no basis on reality.



     They could have a basis in some cases. That would not justify lazy assumptions that they just are.

     A guy on the internet told me once that you should never accept a claim because a "guy on the internet" tells you. He must be right.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Gurn Blanston on July 02, 2022, 08:45:49 AM
Quote from: milk on July 02, 2022, 07:16:13 AM
Maybe I'm on a different planet. I thought he was saying that quotas mean promoting people who aren't necessarily qualified. So, there are many fields of medicine in the U.S. right now that are dominated by women. Gastro, pediatrics, OB, etc. one could reach down for men with lower text scores. But just not for treating my kids please.

To be precise he was saying that women aren't physically qualified to be firefighters,  and that 'giving' them a 'quota' of jobs takes opportunities away from men,  who are certainly stronger.  I first heard this argument 10 years before Greg was born.  It didn't hold water then,  either.

8)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on July 02, 2022, 09:08:18 AM
In the US in 2020, 4% of career firefighters were women. (https://www.nfpa.org/News-and-Research/Publications-and-media/Press-Room/News-releases/2020/Females-still-make-up-less-than-10-percent-of-the-US-fire-service)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on July 02, 2022, 09:17:11 AM
My home is +30°C and my brain is melting. Sorry. Back when summer over.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on July 02, 2022, 09:43:28 AM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on July 02, 2022, 08:45:49 AM
To be precise he was saying that women aren't physically qualified to be firefighters,  and that 'giving' them a 'quota' of jobs takes opportunities away from men,  who are certainly stronger.  I first heard this argument 10 years before Greg was born.  It didn't hold water then,  either.


And also, you're going to die in your house on fire.
Because of them women quota.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on July 02, 2022, 09:55:19 AM
Quote from: Herman on July 02, 2022, 09:43:28 AM
And also, you're going to die in your house on fire.
Because of them women quota.

Holy cats, guys! How  can you be so cavalier when greg's life is at risk?!!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on July 02, 2022, 10:10:55 AM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on July 02, 2022, 08:45:49 AM
To be precise he was saying that women aren't physically qualified to be firefighters,  and that 'giving' them a 'quota' of jobs takes opportunities away from men,  who are certainly stronger.  I first heard this argument 10 years before Greg was born.  It didn't hold water then,  either.

8)

A Canadian naval officer I spoke to a few years back made the point that made the point that accommodating women in the service.  It often results in situation, e.g., where four men could be counted on to haul a cable, they had to a allow five if a couple were women.  Increasing a ship's complement by 25% isn't a trivial matter.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on July 02, 2022, 10:21:06 AM
Quote from: Madiel on July 02, 2022, 06:16:01 AM
It's not discriminatory in a legal sense. Discrimination involves taking irrelevant considerations into account. That someone is from a group that has been persistently under-represented is a relevant consideration.

So are you saying that a higher academic achievement isn't a relevant consideration when filling class sized at high-standard universities?


Quote from: Madiel on July 02, 2022, 06:16:01 AM
You can't have it both ways. Either people from different races are, at a population level, equally likely to have the necessary skills, or white people are inherently better at something and hence that's why more of them are 'better qualified'.

But if race is not really a determiner of the skills, then the skew in who is "better qualified" is a reflection of other advantages. Advantages that you are explicitly refusing to do anything about.

Sure, all very enlighten ... unless it's your son who loses out going to Harvard or Stanford because the slot goes to a "qualified" black girl with much lower marks.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 02, 2022, 01:46:32 PM
Quote from: milk on July 02, 2022, 07:11:31 AM
Here's your quote:

You can't have it both ways. Either people from different races are, at a population level, equally likely to have the necessary skills, or white people are inherently better at something and hence that's why more of them are 'better qualified'.

It could be that poverty, schools, crime, parenting, lack of parenting, cultural forces, leaded paint, social policy, drugs, racism, etc. lead to deficiencies that have nothing to do with anything inherent, if I'm understanding what exactly you mean the word. I came across something somewhere recently about Asian families and how family honor played a big part in how well their children did in academia. I'm not even saying this is a good thing because I'm not teaching my kids that they have to do well in school to honor the family. To me, it's nuts. But I digress.
I think there are a lot of reasons to put the breaks on this fad of Equity (which is a code word for quotas). One reason is that it pits people against each other, and I'm not talking about white kids. Another reason is that it demeans the groups of people it is targeting. Also, it's a bandaid. Instead of fixing the broken education and social systems that are likely the cause of poor academic performances, it just accepts it cannot do better and promotes or admits people who may do better elsewhere.
I wouldn't rule out all affirmative action programs. It seems to have worked in the military, for example. But I worry it's creating an untenable situation in the States.

Right, so you didn't understand what I said, because you're agreeing with my basic point. I didn't set up a "false dichotomy".

It's just that you don't agree with a method of fixing the problem. I mean, you eventually say that it WORKS in the military, but then you don't want to use it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 02, 2022, 01:58:35 PM
Quote from: Fëanor on July 02, 2022, 10:21:06 AM
So are you saying that a higher academic achievement isn't a relevant consideration when filling class sized at high-standard universities?

I'm saying that ignoring the reasons why someone has a higher achievement - reasons BESIDES innate ability - is discriminatory.

Honestly, if you're going to insist that one number is the determiner of entry, you are being wilfully blind to how that number actually came about.

Plus, there is ample evidence that a score like that, on its own, is NOT a good predictor of success at university.

Nor is having gone to the "right" school a great predictor of real world ability. Honestly, I feel like I could send you off to listen to about half a dozen episodes of the Revisionist History podcast just for starters...

The whole idea of people who are "more qualified" is fundamentally problematic. Qualified is like pregnant or married, in that either you've cleared the bar or you haven't. You're upset that black people who have just cleared the bar might get accepted ahead of white people who have soared over the bar, to which my response is that you are wilfully refusing to even ASK whether the black person had lead weight in their pockets and the white person had a fucking trampoline.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on July 02, 2022, 02:39:08 PM
Well said.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on July 02, 2022, 02:51:52 PM
Quote from: Madiel on July 02, 2022, 01:46:32 PM
Right, so you didn't understand what I said, because you're agreeing with my basic point. I didn't set up a "false dichotomy".

It's just that you don't agree with a method of fixing the problem. I mean, you eventually say that it WORKS in the military, but then you don't want to use it.
I'm moderate. I don't say affirmative action is always bad and I definitely don't believe that any ethnic groups are inherently better. Yes, I agree that many things may play a part in hindering people from developing their full potential. Where we disagree is that quotas are always or often a good solution. I'm skeptical that they are. In Harvard, you my be pitting Asian individuals against other individuals who haven't worked as hard for whatever reason. There's plenty of data to argue over. Why are fewer black students passing the bar these days? I'm not claiming to know. There is an argument to be made on both side and there are books written. Have you read "Mismatch: How Affirmative Action Hurts Students It's Intended to Help, and Why Universities Won't Admit It" by law professor Richard Sander and legal journalist Stuart Taylor? I haven't! Nor have I read books defending affirmative action. I'm not an expert in this topic.

"The average African-American first-year law student has a grade-point average in the bottom 10% of his or her class. And while undergraduate GPAs for affirmative-action beneficiaries aren't quite as disappointing, that is in part because, as explained below, affirmative-action beneficiaries tend to shy away from subjects like science and engineering, which are graded on a tougher curve than other subjects."
https://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/the-sad-irony-of-affirmative-action

I don't know if that's right. National affairs is a conservative publication but I doubt they're making it up. What is the reason that Asians are the top performers? I've no idea. I pretty much hate this topic but I do think the woke answer to these things is just driving people in the wrong direction. The answers to the problem are not easy. I used to just go with the left on everything. Now, I'm not so sure. I think in the military, affirmative action was probably a good idea. At Harvard, probably not. The critical idea, including oppression and intersectionality, driving equity quotas is irrational. I think it's going to end up hurting everyone.

Back to the idea of disparities. Quotas are a bandaid. Fix education. Improve poverty. Maybe that's a better solution. I understood what you said. You said that either one is racist or one thinks everyone is ready for Harvard or MIT or brain surgery. No.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on July 02, 2022, 02:55:02 PM
Quote from: Madiel on July 02, 2022, 01:58:35 PM
I'm saying that ignoring the reasons why someone has a higher achievement - reasons BESIDES innate ability - is discriminatory.

Honestly, if you're going to insist that one number is the determiner of entry, you are being wilfully blind to how that number actually came about.

Plus, there is ample evidence that a score like that, on its own, is NOT a good predictor of success at university.

Nor is having gone to the "right" school a great predictor of real world ability. Honestly, I feel like I could send you off to listen to about half a dozen episodes of the Revisionist History podcast just for starters...

The whole idea of people who are "more qualified" is fundamentally problematic. Qualified is like pregnant or married, in that either you've cleared the bar or you haven't. You're upset that black people who have just cleared the bar might get accepted ahead of white people who have soared over the bar, to which my response is that you are wilfully refusing to even ASK whether the black person had lead weight in their pockets and the white person had a fucking trampoline.
I think there is plenty of evidence that SAT scores do predict GPA.

BTW: I'm open to changing my mind on this topic. What would change yours?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on July 02, 2022, 03:21:50 PM
Quote from: Madiel on July 02, 2022, 01:58:35 PM
...
The whole idea of people who are "more qualified" is fundamentally problematic. Qualified is like pregnant or married, in that either you've cleared the bar or you haven't. You're upset that black people who have just cleared the bar might get accepted ahead of white people who have soared over the bar, to which my response is that you are wilfully refusing to even ASK whether the black person had lead weight in their pockets and the white person had a fucking trampoline.

... Boloney.

In any case if Americans really care about Blacks, Hispanics, or poor people regardless of race, they would ensure that all children had equal opportunity to attend high quality public schools.  As it is the better off, rather than pay taxes, would rather spend the money to send their kids to private or so-called charter schools to given them an advantage over kid in public schools  -- there at least we can perhaps agree.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on July 02, 2022, 03:53:23 PM
Quote from: Fëanor on July 02, 2022, 03:21:50 PM
... Boloney.

In any case if Americans really care about Blacks, Hispanics, or poor people regardless of race, they would ensure that all children had equal opportunity to attend high quality public schools.  As it is the better off, rather than pay taxes, would rather spend the money to send their kids to private or so-called charter schools to given them an advantage over kid in public schools  -- there at least we can perhaps agree.
According to University of Texas Statistics, the credentials students enter with do predict their academic performance. Madiel is on weak ground. If he could show otherwise, I'd be happy. Really. Then, the problem would vanish and the whole thing would just be a matter of making university student numbers match the identity ratio they're looking for. I guess that'd work. Or, they could just skew it towards some intersectional oppression matrix - which is what some people really want. That seems more sinister to me, more divisive. This brings us away from any "liberal" logic to what critical academic theorists really want: they don't care about any of these real world measures of ability. They don't believe any of it anyway. It wouldn't matter what achievements or accomplishments are reached because it's all part of a structure of power and oppression. In the critical view, we don't judge by the "liberal" views which are inherently skewed towards white supremacy and capitalist oppression. We should really be judging by narratives of oppression in all fields, including mathematics and sciences.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 02, 2022, 03:58:42 PM
Quote from: milk on July 02, 2022, 02:51:52 PM
I understood what you said. You said that either one is racist or one thinks everyone is ready for Harvard or MIT or brain surgery. No.

Well you clearly did NOT understand it. I never suggested that "everyone" is ready for brain surgery. The question is whether race is a predictor of readiness for brain surgery.

And I was referencing someone else's previous acknowledgement that race was not a predictor of ability to be a brain surgeon, while simultaneously not acknowledging what that logically means in terms of who is admitted to brain surgery school.

We see this all the time: an intellectual statement that race or gender is not in itself a predictor of talent or skill, coupled with a refusal to examine why real world results don't match up with that intellectual statement.

If you believe that men and women have equal capacity to perform a job (which I think is true for the great majority of jobs), but observe that the number of men and women being employed to do that job is not equal, then you ought to ask yourself what's going on. Then maybe you find that the rate of hiring is actually roughly equal but the number of CANDIDATES is not equal, and you ask yourself what is going on there.

Recently I heard someone saying that the number of men and women studying computer science is now roughly equal, but the number being hired in Silicon Valley is still heavily skewed, whereas the number being hired by other sorts of large companies like banks is now roughly equal.

Either gender is a relevant predictor of ability in computer science or it isn't. This isn't a statement that every woman is good at computer science. It's a statement that being a woman might not reduce the chance that you're good at computer science. And if that's the case, it's necessary to find a different explanation as to why women aren't being hired as computer scientists.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 02, 2022, 04:02:50 PM
As to the whole scores question, I might have had in mind "test scores" not "grades". I don't know all your American terminology. A number you're using to decide who gets to go to universities that isn't a good predictor of success.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on July 02, 2022, 04:06:47 PM
Quote from: Madiel on July 02, 2022, 03:58:42 PM
Well you clearly did NOT understand it. I never suggested that "everyone" is ready for brain surgery. The question is whether race is a predictor of readiness for brain surgery.

And I was referencing someone else's previous acknowledgement that race was not a predictor of ability to be a brain surgeon, while simultaneously not acknowledging what that logically means in terms of who is admitted to brain surgery school.

We see this all the time: an intellectual statement that race or gender is not in itself a predictor of talent or skill, coupled with a refusal to examine why real world results don't match up with that intellectual statement.

If you believe that men and women have equal capacity to perform a job (which I think is true for the great majority of jobs), but observe that the number of men and women being employed to do that job is not equal, then you ought to ask yourself what's going on. Then maybe you find that the rate of hiring is actually roughly equal but the number of CANDIDATES is not equal, and you ask yourself what is going on there.

Recently I heard someone saying that the number of men and women studying computer science is now roughly equal, but the number being hired in Silicon Valley is still heavily skewed, whereas the number being hired by other sorts of large companies like banks is now roughly equal.

Either gender is a relevant predictor of ability in computer science or it isn't. This isn't a statement that every woman is good at computer science. It's a statement that being a woman might not reduce the chance that you're good at computer science.
It is hard to track the context of everyone's comments so I'm sorry if I misunderstood.
I'm not sure I buy your statistics here. Maybe. Why do more women go into certain medical fields? Is it because men are facing discrimination in those fields? Why are there more men in prison? Is it because men are being picked on?

Don't take these last comments too seriously. My children are out of control !
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on July 02, 2022, 04:25:47 PM
Quote from: Fëanor on July 02, 2022, 10:10:55 AM
A Canadian naval officer I spoke to a few years back made the point that made the point that accommodating women in the service.  It often results in situation, e.g., where four men could be counted on to haul a cable, they had to a allow five if a couple were women.  Increasing a ship's complement by 25% isn't a trivial matter.

How often? I don't buy this. How many jobs on a ship would require this "25% increase" even if, which I doubt, the women really were remarkably weak?

It also assumes that all men are big and strong. I assume that the same officer seeing four weedy guys hauling a cable would add a fifth without thinking it represented a crisis.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 02, 2022, 05:11:18 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on July 02, 2022, 04:25:47 PM
It also assumes that all men are big and strong. I assume that the same officer seeing four weedy guys hauling a cable would add a fifth without thinking it represented a crisis.

No no no. All men on ships are big manly men. Who bunk together. Just like The Village People sang about.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on July 02, 2022, 05:28:23 PM
I'm a lumberjack, and I'm okay!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 02, 2022, 06:04:29 PM
 :laugh:
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on July 02, 2022, 06:05:24 PM
I would think work ethic a more important factor in number of staff required.

Anyone here want to argue that women are lazier than men?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on July 02, 2022, 06:17:13 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on July 02, 2022, 06:05:24 PM
I would think work ethic a more important factor in number of staff required.

Anyone here want to argue that women are lazier than men?

With all the men who leap to do the housework?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on July 02, 2022, 06:35:31 PM
Quote from: Fëanor on July 02, 2022, 10:10:55 AM
A Canadian naval officer I spoke to a few years back made the point that made the point that accommodating women in the service.  It often results in situation, e.g., where four men could be counted on to haul a cable, they had to a allow five if a couple were women.  Increasing a ship's complement by 25% isn't a trivial matter.

Right, 25% more staff is required because sailors spend 100% of their time hauling cables.

Women, on average, achieve superior academic performance compared with men. Did the U.S.S. Fitzgerald collide with a slow-moving container ship because the sailors weren't hauling cables fast enough, or because the ship was staffed by idiots?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on July 03, 2022, 04:00:29 AM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on July 02, 2022, 06:35:31 PM
Right, 25% more staff is required because sailors spend 100% of their time hauling cables.

Women, on average, achieve superior academic performance compared with men. Did the U.S.S. Fitzgerald collide with a slow-moving container ship because the sailors weren't hauling cables fast enough, or because the ship was staffed by idiots?

All true, and I'm sure that women make excellent radar operators for example.

But there is the fact that women demand, as a matter of human right, to apply for jobs such as firefighter -- or cable hauler -- that require physical strength.

When I asked my naval officer acquaintance whether strength criteria and testing couldn't perhaps be part of selection, he remined me that such criteria, (seemingly rational), are denounced as purposely designed to exclude women.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on July 03, 2022, 04:22:12 AM
Quote from: milk on July 02, 2022, 03:53:23 PM
According to University of Texas Statistics, the credentials students enter with do predict their academic performance. Madiel is on weak ground. If he could show otherwise, I'd be happy. Really. Then, the problem would vanish and the whole thing would just be a matter of making university student numbers match the identity ratio they're looking for. I guess that'd work. Or, they could just skew it towards some intersectional oppression matrix - which is what some people really want. That seems more sinister to me, more divisive. This brings us away from any "liberal" logic to what critical academic theorists really want: they don't care about any of these real world measures of ability. They don't believe any of it anyway. It wouldn't matter what achievements or accomplishments are reached because it's all part of a structure of power and oppression. In the critical view, we don't judge by the "liberal" views which are inherently skewed towards white supremacy and capitalist oppression. We should really be judging by narratives of oppression in all fields, including mathematics and sciences.

You alluded to the fact that leading US universities have an embarrassment of Asian students admitted on the basis of high achievement.  (I think I've heard vague talk of quotas -- which I certainly hope is untrue).  But certainly "White privilege" isn't the reason for the Asian students' success.

I'm brought to mind of the 65,000 Vietnamize "boat people" who were admitted to Canada in the aftermath of that war.  These folks arrived with little more that the raggy tee-shirts on their backs but today they, and certainly their children, enjoy the economic status of average Canadians at least.  They have a very respectable proportion of multi-millionaires and their kids are well represented amongst those high-achieving Asian students.  Sometimes I wish our Canadian indigenous communities would take an example from Vietnamize immigrants hard work and whine a little less about discrimination and poverty.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 03, 2022, 04:38:03 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on July 03, 2022, 04:22:12 AM
Sometimes I wish our Canadian indigenous communities would take an example from Vietnamize immigrants hard work and whine a little less about discrimination and poverty.

Maybe no-one was forbidding Vietnamese migrant kids from speaking Vietnamese at home (indeed allowing them to stay home), or sexually abusing them, or burying them in the schoolyard? Just speculating.

Anyway, this a thread that's supposed to be about American politics, not about spectacular insensitivity to what happened to Canada's indigenous population.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on July 03, 2022, 06:44:59 AM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on July 02, 2022, 06:35:31 PM
Women, on average, achieve superior academic performance compared with men.

And men aren't going to college anymore or are dropping out.  Most schools are at 60-40 (female to male percentages) and within the next few years it will be predicted to be 70-30 and some colleges are already there.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on July 03, 2022, 06:48:12 AM
That's a bad trend.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on July 03, 2022, 07:12:49 AM
Quote from: Madiel on July 03, 2022, 04:38:03 AM
Maybe no-one was forbidding Vietnamese migrant kids from speaking Vietnamese at home (indeed allowing them to stay home), or sexually abusing them, or burying them in the schoolyard? Just speculating.

Anyway, this a thread that's supposed to be about American politics, not about spectacular insensitivity to what happened to Canada's indigenous population.

I will say very clearly that I view the residential school system as an abhorrent scar on the record of Canadian human rights, but manditory attendance ended in 1947 and the last school was closed 25 years ago.  Today reparations (!!) are being made today on account of them.

(Reparations for American descendants of slaves ... humm  ::) )

Misguided Canadian politicians and educators of the 19th century, with White man's arrogance, assumed that assimilation, (albeit forced), would be a net benefit for the indigenous people.  They were wrong, and evils were done that not even they expected, notably physical and sexual abuse o young children.  Part from the inherent injustice of forced assimilation, authorities assigned operation of the schools to various churches without requiring accountability from them.  (It's always mistake to assume the religious folk will do the right thing.)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 03, 2022, 08:10:38 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on July 03, 2022, 07:12:49 AM
I will say very clearly that I view the residential school system as an abhorrent scare on the record of Canadian human rights, but manditory attendance ended in 1947 and the last school was closed 25 years ago.  Today reparations (!!) are being made today on account of them.

(Reparations for American descendants of slaves ... humm  ::) )

Misguided Canadian politicians and educators of the 19th century, with White man's arrogance, assumed that assimilation, (albeit forced), would be a net benefit for the indigenous people.  They were wrong, and evils were done that not even they expected, notably physical and sexual abuse o young children.  Part from the inherent injustice of forced assimilation, authorities assigned operation of the schools to various churches without requiring accountability from them.  (It's always mistake to assume the religious folk will do the right thing.)
Were the remains of the Indigenous schoolchildren in Canada ever actually found? I remember this story from about this time last year and it just seemed to drop off the radar in a hurry.
Quote(It's always mistake to assume the religious folk will do the right thing.)
Why? I'll remind you that it was "religious folk" who were behind the abolition of slavery.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Spotted Horses on July 03, 2022, 08:17:06 AM
Quote from: DizzyD on July 03, 2022, 08:10:38 AM
I'll remind you that it was "religious folk" who were behind the abolition of slavery.

...and the establishment of slavery. Just sayin'.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 03, 2022, 08:18:10 AM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on July 03, 2022, 08:17:06 AM
...and the establishment of slavery. Just sayin'.
And it was the irreligious who brought us the gulags. Just sayin'. In other words, what's the correlation? It sounds like a somewhat bigoted statement to me.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on July 03, 2022, 08:22:01 AM
Quote from: DizzyD on July 03, 2022, 08:10:38 AM
Were the remains of the Indigenous schoolchildren in Canada ever actually found? I remember this story from about this time last year and it just seemed to drop off the radar in a hurry.

Yes, many have been located and the search actively goes on to find more unmarked graves.  Efforts are planned to identify the remains of specific children.

What might be helpful to locating further remains and identifying the children would be the release information relating to the operation of the schools  by the Roman Catholic Church which is not yet forthcoming.  (The RC Church operated more residential schools than any other denomination;  the Anglican Church operated the second most.)  None of the denominations' higher authorities demanded sufficient accountability from the operators on-the-ground to prevent the mental, physical, and sex abuse that took place.

Note that I never said that all religious people are bad, nor religion in general, (though the thought has crossed my mind).

Since we're supposed to be talking about American polities, my understanding is that similar, compulsory residential schools existed in the USA, at least in some areas.  If I'm wrong please let me know.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 03, 2022, 08:23:16 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on July 03, 2022, 08:22:01 AM
Yes, many have been located and the search actively goes on to find more unmarked graves.  Efforts are planned to identify the remains of specific children.

What might be helpful to locating further remains and identifying the children would be the release information relating to the operation of the schools  by the Roman Catholic Church which is not yet forthcoming.  (The RC Church operated more residential schools than any other denomination;  the Anglican Church operated the second most.)  None of the denominations' higher authorities demanded sufficient accountability from the operators on-the-ground to prevent the mental, physical, and sex abuse that took place.
Can you give me a link to a story about the recovered remains? I'd be interested in seeing it. As I said the story just seemed to vanish into nowhere.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on July 03, 2022, 08:27:46 AM
Quote from: DizzyD on July 03, 2022, 08:23:16 AM
Can you give me a link to a story about the recovered remains? I'd be interested in seeing it. As I said the story just seemed to vanish into nowhere.

So for example this CBC story re. Manitoba residential schools, fairly recent as of May 22nd ... https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/residential-school-site-ground-searches-1.6468557 (https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/residential-school-site-ground-searches-1.6468557)

Of course, coverage was most intense earlier after the first sizeable locations of unmarked graves.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 03, 2022, 08:30:56 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on July 03, 2022, 08:27:46 AM
So for example this CBC story re. Manitoba residential schools, fairly recent as of May 22nd ... https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/residential-school-site-ground-searches-1.6468557 (https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/residential-school-site-ground-searches-1.6468557)

Of course, coverage was most intense earlier after the first sizeable locations of unmarked graves.
Yes, that's the sort of story that dropped out of sight, and they mentioned forthcoming explorations and exhumations. I wonder if those were done. My understanding is that the initial stories were based on sort of sonar explorations of the ground along with tribal traditions.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on July 03, 2022, 08:58:37 AM
Quote from: Spotted Horses on July 03, 2022, 08:17:06 AM
...and the establishment of slavery. Just sayin'.

There is evidence of slavery during prehistory.  It exists today as well.  I am not certain that there is a correlation between slavery and religion based on available evidence.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 03, 2022, 08:59:17 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on July 03, 2022, 08:22:01 AM
...
Note that I never said that all religious people are bad, nor religion in general, (though the thought has crossed my mind).
Well after the initial reports last year I remember reading of many Canadian churches being burned, so I guess we can't count on the innate goodness of the non-religious either. I think Solzhenitsyn was on target here:

"Ideology - that is what gives evildoing its long-sought justification and gives the evildoer the necessary steadfastness and determination. That is the social theory which helps to make his acts seem good instead of bad in his own and others' eyes, so that he won't hear reproaches and curses but will receive praise and honors."


QuoteSince we're supposed to be talking about American polities, my understanding is that similar, compulsory residential schools existed in the USA, at least in some areas.  If I'm wrong please let me know.
I'm sure there were, but I don't know their history unfortunately. It's undeniable that the treatment of native Americans was abominable.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on July 03, 2022, 09:34:27 AM
Quote from: DavidW on July 03, 2022, 06:44:59 AM
Most schools are at 60-40 (female to male percentages) and within the next few years it will be predicted to be 70-30 and some colleges are already there.

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on July 03, 2022, 06:48:12 AM
That's a bad trend.

By then the entire USA will be Surf City, with "two girls for every boy".

Prophetic Beach Boys song!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on July 03, 2022, 08:47:35 PM
Quote from: Madiel on July 01, 2022, 06:22:57 PM
All Lives Matter is best illustrated by a cartoon I saw where someone holding a hose is declaring that all houses matter when only one of the houses is on fire.

Black Lives Matter is not claiming, and has never claimed, that non-black lives don't matter. We say that black lives matter because the value of white lives was never in question in the first place.
I've seen that before.
This is the problem. First of all, slogans suck.
Second of all, people are seeing different points. Because slogans leave out a lot of information. Because they suck.
The problem with that analogy is that it's entirely missing the point by ignoring the greater problems of everyone else. Obviously not only black people's houses are on fire.

So we can acknowledge that demographic does have the biggest struggle, but we don't need to trivialize the struggle of everyone else. That is what the pushback against All Lives Matter does. Anyone can have some of the same issues, with police, for example.

Also the whole generalizing thing is just nasty. The oppression olympics is only going to reduce empathy in the long run. Not only are we constantly generalizing with that type of language, ignoring the individual, but it also always involve a dismissal of others whose oppression numbers don't score highest.



Quote from: Herman on July 02, 2022, 06:22:49 AM
The point was: paid work equals fire fighting.
Women aren't good fire fighters due to lack of muscle.
Women better stay home.
I see we are doing some obvious trolling today.  ;D :P








Quote from: DavidW on July 02, 2022, 07:13:18 AM
I didn't see Greg's nonsense about firefighters before.  Women started becoming firefighters decades ago.  All firefighters, regardless of gender, must pass the CPAT.

They need to demonstrate the following items, or they are not going into a burning building:

So Greg's hypothetical has no basis on reality.
You're looking at it too specifically lol. (wasn't trying to accurately match real world examples, purely just trying to get the idea out there as quickly as possible)
I just ripped it off of an old idea I've heard in school before. I had a quiz before, and my teacher marked a question wrong: "Is a woman who is not strong enough to operate the hose not being allowed as a firefighter considered discrimination?" (not the exact wording, this was over like 12 years ago). Me and my friend wrote "no" and were both really confused why it was marked wrong.
(i do remember my teacher mentioning that she subscribed to more old school feminism or whatever, which would explain the thought process. But not a big deal, she was alright).
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on July 03, 2022, 09:32:30 PM
Quote from: greg on July 03, 2022, 08:47:35 PM
(wasn't trying to accurately match real world examples, purely just trying to get the idea out there as quickly as possible)


Then try giving us actual real-world examples. If you can't do that then start asking yourself if you've been worrying about something that isn't a real problem.

And stop listening to the "sources" who made you believe it was.

And you're wasting everybody's time having us disprove this nonsense to you that you're now trying to duck rather than just admitting you were uninformed or misinformed..
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 03, 2022, 11:06:16 PM
Quote from: greg on July 03, 2022, 08:47:35 PM
The problem with that analogy is that it's entirely missing the point by ignoring the greater problems of everyone else. Obviously not only black people's houses are on fire.

...

So we can acknowledge that demographic does have the biggest struggle, but we don't need to trivialize the struggle of everyone else.
That is what the pushback against All Lives Matter does. Anyone can have some of the same issues, with police, for example.

Everyone else's greater problems... but the biggest struggle... but trivalizing...

There is not a "pushback" against All Lives Matter. All Lives Matter was the pushback. It was the pushback against actually acknowledging which demographic has a bigger struggle. Your complaint is that people have reacted negatively to a slogan that was expressly designed to disclaim the power of the original slogan.

George Floyd was murdered by a police officer. Please explain what problem is greater than being killed. There are plenty of other cases of black people dying at the hands of police which I don't consider murder but which certainly involve fairly profound levels of recklessness.

Do only black people die at the hands of police? No. But they die disproportionately. And that was my point to you: the relative value of white lives wasn't in question in the first place. Black Lives Matter arose because there was a history of not regarding the loss of black lives as being as significant as the loss of white lives. A history of accepting a rate of black deaths that would be completely unacceptable if white lives were lost at the same rate.

And the slogan All Lives Matter was intended to erase that disparity, to say once again that the disparity didn't matter.

Black Lives Matter doesn't trivialise anyone's struggle, not least because it isn't about "struggle". It's about death. I don't know what problem you think is greater than death. And the fundamental issue is that the life expectancy of one race is lower.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on July 03, 2022, 11:27:56 PM
Quote from: Madiel on July 03, 2022, 11:06:16 PM


Black Lives Matter doesn't trivialise anyone's struggle, not least because it isn't about "struggle". It's about death. I don't know what problem you think is greater than death. And the fundamental issue is that the life expectancy of one race is lower.

Please make that 'violent death'.

However, you're talking to a giant void.

Quote from: greg on July 03, 2022, 08:47:35 PM
You're looking at it too specifically lol. (wasn't trying to accurately match real world examples, purely just trying to get the idea out there as quickly as possible)
I just ripped it off of an old idea I've heard in school before.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 03, 2022, 11:31:32 PM
Violent death in particular, yes.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on July 04, 2022, 05:30:26 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on July 03, 2022, 09:32:30 PMyou're now trying to duck rather than just admitting you were uninformed or misinformed.

And that is greg through and through.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on July 04, 2022, 06:01:43 AM
Quote from: Madiel on July 03, 2022, 11:06:16 PM
Everyone else's greater problems... but the biggest struggle... but trivalizing...

There is not a "pushback" against All Lives Matter. All Lives Matter was the pushback. It was the pushback against actually acknowledging which demographic has a bigger struggle. Your complaint is that people have reacted negatively to a slogan that was expressly designed to disclaim the power of the original slogan.

George Floyd was murdered by a police officer. Please explain what problem is greater than being killed. There are plenty of other cases of black people dying at the hands of police which I don't consider murder but which certainly involve fairly profound levels of recklessness.

Do only black people die at the hands of police? No. But they die disproportionately. And that was my point to you: the relative value of white lives wasn't in question in the first place. Black Lives Matter arose because there was a history of not regarding the loss of black lives as being as significant as the loss of white lives. A history of accepting a rate of black deaths that would be completely unacceptable if white lives were lost at the same rate.

And the slogan All Lives Matter was intended to erase that disparity, to say once again that the disparity didn't matter.

Black Lives Matter doesn't trivialise anyone's struggle, not least because it isn't about "struggle". It's about death. I don't know what problem you think is greater than death. And the fundamental issue is that the life expectancy of one race is lower.

That is very well said.  If anyone else comes in here whining that "all lives matter" you should just quote this post.

It reminds me of an appropriate quote: "when you're accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on July 04, 2022, 06:10:29 AM
Quote from: DavidW on July 04, 2022, 06:01:43 AM
That is very well said.  If anyone else comes in here whining that "all lives matter" you should just quote this post.

It reminds me of an appropriate quote: "when you're accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression."

Practically the MAGA theme song.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 04, 2022, 06:23:34 AM
Quote from: Madiel on July 03, 2022, 11:06:16 PM
...
Black Lives Matter doesn't trivialise anyone's struggle, not least because it isn't about "struggle". It's about death. I don't know what problem you think is greater than death. And the fundamental issue is that the life expectancy of one race is lower.
I'm sure there are some very well-meaning and good-hearted people involved in BLM, but unfortunately that is starting to smell like a massive grift.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on July 04, 2022, 06:36:29 AM
Quote from: DizzyD on July 04, 2022, 06:23:34 AM
I'm sure there are some very well-meaning and good-hearted people involved in BLM, but unfortunately that is starting to smell like a massive grift.

Worth separating the cause from any titular organization, I think.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on July 04, 2022, 06:38:58 AM
Quote from: Madiel on July 03, 2022, 11:06:16 PM
Do only black people die at the hands of police? No. But they die disproportionately.

This is unclear and depends on whom you ask, of course. According to Roland Fryer's research, blacks are indeed stopped disproportionately and more likely to experience disproportionate force, but not more likely to be shot than whites in a given interaction with cops. Of course his work has been criticized and defended. Pretty much any statistics are going to get different interpretations.
Here's the conservative Manhattan Institute:

"On-duty police fatally shoot about 1,000 people every year. This number and its racial breakdown have remained remarkably steady since 2015. The overall Post tally has ranged from a low of 958 in 2016, to a "record" of 1,055 in 2021 (reported as this paper went to press), with any pattern difficult to distinguish from random chance."

"Approximately a quarter of those killed are black. This is roughly double the black share of the overall population, but it is in line with—and sometimes below—many other "bench-marks" that one might use for comparison, such as the racial breakdowns of arrests, murders, and violent-crime offenders as reported by victims in surveys."

https://www.manhattan-institute.org/verbruggen-fatal-police-shootings

My question for you is: Could you be wrong in your interpretation? If you ask me the same question, well, first I'd have to give you mine. It is that the situation is unclear. There's definitely racism. It's not everywhere and in everything and not apparent in many of the cases people have protested (Atlanta, Kenosha). But I'm not surprised if racism is a serious problem in some situations. Plus, this atmosphere created by BLM and these protests could have made crime worse in black neighborhoods if cops pull back. This is something Fryer has studied somewhere (I'll have to look for a link) - I believe in Ferguson.

(I did find a bunch of links, from The Atlantic to the WSJ. Here's the Manhattan again. I know it's conservative but it has no firewall. You can read about Fryer's study at least: https://www.manhattan-institute.org/verbruggen-depolicing-alternatives)

However, I may be getting this wrong. BLM may actually go down as a group that really did help the country overall. For me, I'm a bit in the fence in that the greater awareness of how police treat people (and minority people) has got to produce some good somewhere. At the moment, I kind of feel like all these protesters would do a million times more for everyone by just getting involved in programs to help reach young people in at-risk places or situations - stuff like that.



Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 04, 2022, 06:51:37 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on July 04, 2022, 06:36:29 AM
Worth separating the cause from any titular organization, I think.
Well religion isn't usually given that kind of a break though.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on July 04, 2022, 06:54:18 AM
Quote from: DizzyD on July 04, 2022, 06:51:37 AM
Well religion isn't usually given that kind of a break though.

Religion is typically the establishment, hardly the "victim."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Johnnie Burgess on July 04, 2022, 06:55:24 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on July 04, 2022, 06:54:18 AM
Religion is typically the establishment, hardly the "victim."

Ask Muslims in China about that.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 04, 2022, 06:57:09 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on July 04, 2022, 06:54:18 AM
Religion is typically the establishment, hardly the "victim."
Define "establishment". In the US it's such things as the mainstream media, the government bureaucracy and academia. Those are hardly bastions of religion.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on July 04, 2022, 07:00:23 AM
Quote from: DizzyD on July 04, 2022, 06:57:09 AM
Define "establishment". In the US it's such things as the mainstream media, the government bureaucracy and academia. Those are hardly bastions of religion.

I'm the music director for a parish of the United Methodist Church. You don't think this church is an establishment? Even apart from the red herrings in your post, your q. puzzles me.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 04, 2022, 07:02:47 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on July 04, 2022, 07:00:23 AM
I'm the music director for a parish of the United Methodist Church. You don't think this church is an establishment? Even apart from the red herrings in your post, your q. puzzles me.
It's AN establishment, not THE establishment. The neighborhood bar is also AN establishment. It's not my red herring, as I'm merely replying to yours.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on July 04, 2022, 07:07:34 AM
Quote from: DizzyD on July 04, 2022, 07:02:47 AM
It's AN establishment, not THE establishment. The neighborhood bar is also AN establishment. It's not my red herring, as I'm merely replying to yours.

I see. Point provisionally taken.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on July 04, 2022, 07:12:51 AM
Quote from: DizzyD on July 04, 2022, 06:51:37 AM
Well religion isn't usually given that kind of a break though.

How do you feel religion has "suffered" in this regard?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 04, 2022, 07:16:18 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on July 04, 2022, 07:12:51 AM
How do you feel religion has "suffered" in this regard?
I didn't say it has. I said religion, particularly Christianity, isn't given the benefit of separating title from intentions in the way that you suggested should be done in the case of BLM. If religion has "suffered" at all it's in the characterization of the whole on the basis of the wrongdoers contained within it, e.g. the Catholic church and pedophile priests, or Protestantism and grifting televangelists. I can also include Islam and radical terrorists, but branding Islam in that way is more outlier or rather "outsider" than Establishment.

In addition, churches/religions weren't founded just a few years ago with an essentially clean slate. BLM was.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on July 04, 2022, 11:28:54 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on July 04, 2022, 06:36:29 AM
Worth separating the cause from any titular organization, I think.

Exactly. The vast majority of protesters had no affiliation with or connection to any organization. They weren't BLM, they were just people who believe that black lives matter. But of course racists need a pretext to defame by alleged association.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 04, 2022, 11:31:09 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on July 04, 2022, 11:28:54 AM
Exactly. The vast majority of protesters had no affiliation with or connection to any organization. They weren't BLM, they were just people who believe that black lives matter. But of course racist a$$holes need a pretext to defame by alleged association.
Not to belabor the point, but are you suggesting that association with BLM is defamation? If so, you've pretty much demonstrated my point from earlier.

And with that I withdraw from discussing politics any further.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: BasilValentine on July 04, 2022, 11:32:46 AM
Quote from: DizzyD on July 04, 2022, 11:31:09 AM
Not to belabor the point, but are you suggesting that association with BLM is defamation?

No, you are.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 04, 2022, 11:34:31 AM
Quote from: BasilValentine on July 04, 2022, 11:32:46 AM
No, you are.
Well one more thing: no, you're the one that used the word "defame". I didn't say anything at all about protestors.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on July 04, 2022, 01:10:52 PM
Quote from: DizzyD on July 04, 2022, 06:23:34 AM
I'm sure there are some very well-meaning and good-hearted people involved in BLM, but unfortunately that is starting to smell like a massive grift.

Alright explain the "grift".  I put it in quotations because I have no idea how protests is associated with grifting!  Who profits?  I assumed that it was a poor choice of words, or you were unfamiliar with the word.  But you've proven this afternoon to delight in word games.  So get on with it.  What are you thinking?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 04, 2022, 01:16:51 PM
Quote from: DavidW on July 04, 2022, 01:10:52 PM
Alright explain the "grift".  I put it in quotations because I have no idea how protests is associated with grifting!  Who profits?
Well specifically the BLM Global Network Fund and PAC. That money came from somewhere.
QuoteI assumed that it was a poor choice of words, or you were unfamiliar with the word.  But you've proven this afternoon to delight in word games.  So get on with it.  What are you thinking?
No, it's grifting, every bit as much as with Jim and Tammy Faye. No word games involved.
(edit) Oh, and this character. G-r-i-f-t.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/goldie-taylorwhere-did-all-the-money-shaun-king-raised-for-black-lives-go

And no word games here either: I'm sick to death of the divisive us vs them tribal garbage, from wherever it comes, or however righteous/unrighteous, holy/unholy and saintly/sinful we want to think this person or that group is. Clear enough? Done.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 04, 2022, 02:08:56 PM
Quote from: milk on July 04, 2022, 06:38:58 AM
This is unclear and depends on whom you ask, of course. According to Roland Fryer's research, blacks are indeed stopped disproportionately and more likely to experience disproportionate force, but not more likely to be shot than whites in a given interaction with cops. Of course his work has been criticized and defended. Pretty much any statistics are going to get different interpretations.
Here's the conservative Manhattan Institute:

"On-duty police fatally shoot about 1,000 people every year. This number and its racial breakdown have remained remarkably steady since 2015. The overall Post tally has ranged from a low of 958 in 2016, to a "record" of 1,055 in 2021 (reported as this paper went to press), with any pattern difficult to distinguish from random chance."

"Approximately a quarter of those killed are black. This is roughly double the black share of the overall population, but it is in line with—and sometimes below—many other "bench-marks" that one might use for comparison, such as the racial breakdowns of arrests, murders, and violent-crime offenders as reported by victims in surveys."

https://www.manhattan-institute.org/verbruggen-fatal-police-shootings

My question for you is: Could you be wrong in your interpretation? If you ask me the same question, well, first I'd have to give you mine. It is that the situation is unclear. There's definitely racism. It's not everywhere and in everything and not apparent in many of the cases people have protested (Atlanta, Kenosha). But I'm not surprised if racism is a serious problem in some situations. Plus, this atmosphere created by BLM and these protests could have made crime worse in black neighborhoods if cops pull back. This is something Fryer has studied somewhere (I'll have to look for a link) - I believe in Ferguson.

(I did find a bunch of links, from The Atlantic to the WSJ. Here's the Manhattan again. I know it's conservative but it has no firewall. You can read about Fryer's study at least: https://www.manhattan-institute.org/verbruggen-depolicing-alternatives)

However, I may be getting this wrong. BLM may actually go down as a group that really did help the country overall. For me, I'm a bit in the fence in that the greater awareness of how police treat people (and minority people) has got to produce some good somewhere. At the moment, I kind of feel like all these protesters would do a million times more for everyone by just getting involved in programs to help reach young people in at-risk places or situations - stuff like that.

Sorry, I don't understand what your problem is. You seem to think that so long as the reason that black people die more often is because the police interact with them more often, you can just stop there and not ask why it is that the police interact with black people more often.

I'm not suggesting that police are going around deliberately homicidal towards black people. Even George Floyd's murder falls in the category of extreme recklessness rather than intent. So sure, black people die more often because police interact with them more often. How you think that makes my "interpretation" wrong I've no idea.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on July 04, 2022, 03:04:41 PM
Quote from: Madiel on July 04, 2022, 02:08:56 PM
Sorry, I don't understand what your problem is. You seem to think that so long as the reason that black people die more often is because the police interact with them more often, you can just stop there and not ask why it is that the police interact with black people more often.

I'm not suggesting that police are going around deliberately homicidal towards black people. Even George Floyd's murder falls in the category of extreme recklessness rather than intent. So sure, black people die more often because police interact with them more often. How you think that makes my "interpretation" wrong I've no idea.
Yes that's right. You'd have to do better in understanding the argument of folks who disagree with you. Yes. Read the articles I quoted from. Watch Loury and McWhorter discuss these issues on YouTube. Have you ever watched them? Glenn Loury, a well-respected economist, used to have a show on bloggerheads channel but he might just have his own channel now. They're interesting and entertaining (there are plenty of other people out there that push back against your side of things but I find Loury and McWhorter credible and accessible and fun to watch). If you don't understand what they're saying then your own arguments might not be very sharp. Basically, the argument is that black people are not disproportionately killed by police. You're right that they are disproportionately involved in violent crime. You're right to ask why. The answer isn't simple. If it were simple, it'd be easy to solve. I'm sure you and I agree on some of the reasons, though I suspect neither of us has all the answers. As I mentioned before, some of the incidents that BLM protested were justified shootings IMO (Kenosha/Atlanta). Obviously Floyd was a straight up murder. To me, BLM is a mixed bag. I can't see how the endless protesting in a place like Kenosha, after a justified police shooting, makes sense as it further damaged that community. And I thought it was bizarre that the criminal in that case got a presidential visit. On the other hand, the guy that was murdered in Minneapolis by a cop (who walked on it), before the Floyd murder, showed how racism can clearly exists in a pattern that ended in a death. But anyway, I digress...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 04, 2022, 03:07:14 PM
I didn't say they were disproportionately involved in violent crime and neither did you. Being arrested more often does NOT mean committed a crime more often. Police decisions as to who to arrest or even question are not neutral and purely objective, and it's foolish to think otherwise.

Plus of course there are some VERY high profile examples of people clearly not committing any crime who die at the hands of police. Nor is it necessary for your crime to be violent for you to be at risk of death.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on July 04, 2022, 03:17:14 PM
Quote from: Madiel on July 04, 2022, 03:07:14 PM
I didn't say they were disproportionately involved in violent crime and neither did you. Being arrested more often does NOT mean committed a crime more often. Police decisions as to who to arrest or even question are not neutral and purely objective, and it's foolish to think otherwise.
I see what you're saying. You believe the higher arrest and conviction stats on violent crime are manufactured by racist targeting of black people? That's interesting. This thinking leads to another problem: that of the victims. The higher number is reflected in the victims too. More black people are victimized by crime, according to these same statistics. In places like Minneapolis where funding was reduced in an attempt to transition away from policing, there was outcry and pushback. I'd have to research that further but the Fryer research in the article I linked to suggests and obvious consequence of running with your ball on this.
Can I ask how you're coming to this conclusion? Are black people victims of violent crime in larger numbers and proportions? Or is that a cooked stat?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 04, 2022, 03:39:54 PM
Quote from: milk on July 04, 2022, 03:17:14 PM
I see what you're saying. You believe the higher arrest and conviction stats on violent crime are manufactured by racist targeting of black people? That's interesting. This thinking leads to another problem: that of the victims. The higher number is reflected in the victims too. More black people are victimized by crime, according to these same statistics. In places like Minneapolis where funding was reduced in an attempt to transition away from policing, there was outcry and pushback. I'd have to research that further but the Fryer research in the article I linked to suggests and obvious consequence of running with your ball on this.
Can I ask how you're coming to this conclusion? Are black people victims of violent crime in larger numbers and proportions? Or is that a cooked stat?

It is more complex than that and I have neither the time nor the inclination to thrash it out here.

There's a tone in some of your posts of suggesting that the higher rate of black deaths is THEIR fault, and maybe that it doesn't need to be fixed. Well in my view it does. Even IF it arises from higher crime rates (rather than just higher rates of police interactions) it still needs to be fixed.

The American attachment to the death penalty is a whole other issue, but even in America the legal view is that people are supposed to be put on trial for their crimes and punished after that. And the death penalty is not available for selling illegal cigarettes. It's certainly not available for a kid playing with a toy gun.

It's not only police but entire community attitudes. A black man in your neighbourhood? Call the police. A black man driving a fancy car? Call the police. It's a self perpetuating cycle of not just crimes being committed but of BELIEVING they're being committed. It also works the other way of characterising white misdemeanours as trivial and not meriting punishment.

Righto. I have work to do.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on July 04, 2022, 05:44:02 PM
Quote from: Madiel on July 04, 2022, 03:39:54 PM
It is more complex than that and I have neither the time nor the inclination to thrash it out here.

There's a tone in some of your posts of suggesting that the higher rate of black deaths is THEIR fault, and maybe that it doesn't need to be fixed. Well in my view it does. Even IF it arises from higher crime rates (rather than just higher rates of police interactions) it still needs to be fixed.
Weird. That's all I can say. I would never blame victims for suffering through a crime.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on July 04, 2022, 09:58:50 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on July 03, 2022, 09:32:30 PM
Then try giving us actual real-world examples. If you can't do that then start asking yourself if you've been worrying about something that isn't a real problem.
Literally any business that hires based on discriminatory practices that need to meet some sort of quota based on race/gender, it's under the philosophy of equity. (Which is currently illegal).

Not to mention that if we allow that type of discrimination based on race/gender, then it could go the other way as well, an employer could say, for example, no to black women because they wanted all white men. (Just another potential problem/can of worms).

Just pointing out the difference between the equity vs. egalitarianism (equal opportunity) way of doing things. One requires force, the other allows for freedom. So I prefer the latter.

There is no need to give real-world examples because the original post was solely about the concepts. I made no such point about anything specific, or that I'm "worried" about it.
for reference, original post: https://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,30359.msg1455823.html#msg1455823






Quote from: SimonNZ on July 03, 2022, 09:32:30 PM
And stop listening to the "sources" who made you believe it was.


Quote from: SimonNZ on July 03, 2022, 09:32:30 PM
And you're wasting everybody's time having us disprove this nonsense to you that you're now trying to duck rather than just admitting you were uninformed or misinformed..
You're going to have to quote what I wrote specifically, because I have no idea what you're referencing.
Misinformed about what?



Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on July 04, 2022, 05:30:26 AM
And that is greg through and through.
Do you actually have anything to say?



Quote from: Herman on July 03, 2022, 11:27:56 PM
Please make that 'violent death'.

However, you're talking to a giant void.
Wtf are you even doing? You quoted me talking about something entirely different, an entirely different concept.  ;D
I have to ask, are we even allowed to talk about concepts here? Or does everyone have the sort of autism where people think everything is super specific and literal, and literally everything conceptual is not understood?

Also funny how you consider me a giant void, when that's what you are. You can't even accurately summarize anything I say.
Not to mention Karl not even saying anything, that's another void itself.






Quote from: Madiel on July 03, 2022, 11:06:16 PM
Everyone else's greater problems... but the biggest struggle... but trivalizing...

There is not a "pushback" against All Lives Matter. All Lives Matter was the pushback. It was the pushback against actually acknowledging which demographic has a bigger struggle. Your complaint is that people have reacted negatively to a slogan that was expressly designed to disclaim the power of the original slogan.

George Floyd was murdered by a police officer. Please explain what problem is greater than being killed. There are plenty of other cases of black people dying at the hands of police which I don't consider murder but which certainly involve fairly profound levels of recklessness.

Do only black people die at the hands of police? No. But they die disproportionately. And that was my point to you: the relative value of white lives wasn't in question in the first place. Black Lives Matter arose because there was a history of not regarding the loss of black lives as being as significant as the loss of white lives. A history of accepting a rate of black deaths that would be completely unacceptable if white lives were lost at the same rate.

And the slogan All Lives Matter was intended to erase that disparity, to say once again that the disparity didn't matter.

Black Lives Matter doesn't trivialise anyone's struggle, not least because it isn't about "struggle". It's about death. I don't know what problem you think is greater than death. And the fundamental issue is that the life expectancy of one race is lower.
Dude, if you want to view All Lives Matter as a pushback, then go ahead.
You could also view it as other people wanting to be included, or people wanting to give a broader context to things, that police brutality affects everyone. Because that's what it is to many people.
There is nothing in the "All Lives Matter" slogan that says there is no disparity among demographics experiencing police brutality.
So someone who experiences police brutality who isn't black should not get a cause, then, because they in the minority demographic of victims? Oh ok, they are Asian and experience police brutality. Well, screw them, I guess.
(and the easiest way to popularize the cause of raising awareness to all victims of police brutality would be to ride the wave of another existing cause... like BLM... hmmm maybe call it ALM?)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on July 04, 2022, 10:47:24 PM
Quote from: greg on July 04, 2022, 09:58:50 PM

There is no need to give real-world examples

Then you're wasting our time with a fear that is merely in your uninformed head.

Because I don't believe you have any idea about the who or where or how of any "quotas" that may or may not exist. I think you simply see a woman or black person doing a job and make assumptions about quotas without evidence.

The problem is yours, not anyone else's.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Herman on July 05, 2022, 12:08:03 AM
Quote from: greg on July 04, 2022, 09:58:50 PM

Dude, if you want to view All Lives Matter as a pushback, then go ahead.
You could also view it as other people wanting to be included, or people wanting to give a broader context to things, that police brutality affects everyone. Because that's what it is to many people.

Just look at the real numbers. Police brutality affects minorities much more.

I, as a very white man with a top education could sweet talk myself out of bank robbery. A black Harvard professor famously got arrested for entering his own home.

All Lives Matter was invented to void BLM, it is a typical right wing snark, and you're lapping it up because it suits you. The whole 'concepts' thing is BS.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 05, 2022, 01:40:59 AM
Quote from: greg on July 04, 2022, 09:58:50 PM
Dude, if you want to view All Lives Matter as a pushback, then go ahead.
You could also view it as other people wanting to be included, or people wanting to give a broader context to things, that police brutality affects everyone. Because that's what it is to many people.
There is nothing in the "All Lives Matter" slogan that says there is no disparity among demographics experiencing police brutality.
So someone who experiences police brutality who isn't black should not get a cause, then, because they in the minority demographic of victims? Oh ok, they are Asian and experience police brutality. Well, screw them, I guess.
(and the easiest way to popularize the cause of raising awareness to all victims of police brutality would be to ride the wave of another existing cause... like BLM... hmmm maybe call it ALM?)

Due, All Lives Matter wasn't a thing until after Black Lives Matter was.

And no, police brutality does not "affect everyone". You seem intent on discounting the relevance of statistics and probability. I mean, sure, there might be some chance of a wealthy white man being beat up by police. But it's a very small chance, and you don't seem to think it's remotely relevant to think about whether everybody should face the same chance of being beat up by police.

Presumably you don't think it's a problem that American women are way more likely to die in childbirth than women in a lot of other countries, because dying in childbirth is a risk for every pregnant woman. There are 2 or 3 states that have managed to buck this trend... largely by studying what happens in other countries where women die a lot less.

Maybe you don't think it's a problem that Americans face death by random shooting far more frequently than people in other countries, because hey, the risk in other countries isn't zero. 3 people died in Denmark this week.

If you insist on saying that something affects everybody, you completely avoid examining risk factors. Completely. And risk factors are the whole issue. We will never, ever prevent all unfortunate deaths at the hands of police so long as we have meaningful policing, just as we will never, ever prevent all deaths in car crashes so long as we have meaningful use of cars for transport. But saying that every person in a car is at some risk of dying in a crash is a really lame excuse for not looking at all of the ways that the rate of death can be reduced - car design (seatbelts, air bags, crumple zones etc etc etc), road design, speed limits, driver training, alcohol limits.

If you insist on All Lives Matter, what you're insisting on is being blind to the reality that some lives are at greater risk than others. And in doing so, you give yourself an excuse for not examining the risk factors.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 05, 2022, 01:45:39 AM
Quote from: milk on July 04, 2022, 05:44:02 PM
Weird. That's all I can say. I would never blame victims for suffering through a crime.

Right. So presumably you don't think black people are inherently more criminal, and consequently don't think that black people having more encounters with police (which on your data leads to being killed by more police more often) is some sort of 'natural' state of affairs that can't be changed.

Because in past generations plenty of people believed exactly that sort of thing.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on July 05, 2022, 03:22:35 AM
Quote from: Madiel on July 05, 2022, 01:45:39 AM
Right. So presumably you don't think black people are inherently more criminal, and consequently don't think that black people having more encounters with police (which on your data leads to being killed by more police more often) is some sort of 'natural' state of affairs that can't be changed.
Don't be a goof.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on July 05, 2022, 05:01:49 AM
(https://fivethirtyeight.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/2022-house-topline-711-2.png?w=712)

(https://fivethirtyeight.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/2022-senate-topline-711-2.png?w=712)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 05, 2022, 06:05:52 AM
Quote from: Herman on July 05, 2022, 12:08:03 AM
...
I, as a very white man with a top education could sweet talk myself out of bank robbery. ...
Come on now. That is absolutely not true. It sounds good and in line with current orthodoxy, but it simply isn't true. Otherwise banks would be empty. Unless of course you're suggesting that whites have less of an inclination to steal. Logic, logic, logic. I'm sorry, but a lot of this thread reads like an episode of The View.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: fbjim on July 05, 2022, 06:20:03 AM
There have been high profile news stories about unjustified police brutality where white men were victimized - the most egregious and infuriating being Daniel Shaver.

Despite some of these getting news coverage, they tend not to be particular causes of protests, because- to be blunt, the "All Lives Matter" crew never cared enough to do so. Frankly when I see these mentioned, they're nearly always done as rhetorical "gotchas".
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 05, 2022, 06:22:02 AM
Quote from: fbjim on July 05, 2022, 06:20:03 AM
There have been high profile news stories about unjustified police brutality where white men were victimized - the most egregious and infuriating being Daniel Shaver.

Despite some of these getting news coverage, they tend not to be particular causes of protests, because- to be blunt, the "All Lives Matter" crew never cared enough to do so. ...
Nor probably did the media care enough to cover it thoroughly. Not enough potential for group vs group conflict.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: fbjim on July 05, 2022, 06:24:23 AM
The Daniel Shaver shooting was covered extensively, both domestically and internationally. Both the shooting itself and the officer's inevitable acquittal.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 05, 2022, 06:25:12 AM
Quote from: fbjim on July 05, 2022, 06:24:23 AM
The Daniel Shaver shooting was covered extensively, both domestically and internationally. Both the shooting itself and the officer's inevitable acquittal.
I never heard about it. I did hear extensively about George Floyd. Are trigger-happy authoritarian cops a problem? Yes. But it isn't necessarily a racial issue. In my younger days I had a run-in with an arrogant local officer in which I could've been killed if I had made even a teeny tiny wrong move. I'm white.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on July 05, 2022, 06:32:42 AM
(https://www.statista.com/graphic/1/585152/people-shot-to-death-by-us-police-by-race.jpg)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: fbjim on July 05, 2022, 06:37:52 AM
To put it another way, it would be one thing if "all lives matter" were a call for inter-racial solidarity to rein in all police violence. In practice it was almost never used this way except either purely rhetorically, or as a platitude.

It is true that despite base rates, unjustified killings can affect anyone. The question does become then- why it is that minority groups are the ones who care enough to actually try to do something about it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 05, 2022, 06:40:39 AM
Quote from: fbjim on July 05, 2022, 06:37:52 AM
To put it another way, it would be one thing if "all lives matter" were a call for inter-racial solidarity to rein in all police violence. ...
Maybe that's the tack that BLM and the media should've taken, in the manner of civil rights activists in the 50s and 60s. The media thrive on conflict. They stoke it.
Quote from: fbjim on July 05, 2022, 06:37:52 AM
... The question does become then- why it is that minority groups are the ones who care enough to actually try to do something about it.
The answer could partly be that unjustified killings of minorities are the ones that the media prefer to focus on.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: fbjim on July 05, 2022, 07:03:07 AM
The reason minority groups tend to have higher levels of inter-group solidarity is not "the media".

I think it would be worthwhile for people to protest all unjustified police killings - but a) asking minority activists to do the work and be activists for people outside their group, rather than having them do that work themselves is rather bizarre - b) intra-group solidarity is not a creation of "the media" but of historical facts of shared culture and interest (see: solidarity among groups of Asian-American immigrants despite the media virtually never caring about them)  and c) in practice, after its origination as an anodyne liberal sentiment, "All lives matter" became used by the same groups defending the use of deadly force by police officers.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 05, 2022, 07:06:50 AM
Quote from: fbjim on July 05, 2022, 07:03:07 AM
The reason minority groups tend to have higher levels of inter-group solidarity is not "the media".
So then to you it's not really a question. Yes, it's the media in large part. It's in their interest to divide, not unite.
QuoteI think it would be worthwhile for people to protest all unjustified police killings - but a) asking minority activists to do the work and be activists for people outside their group, rather than having them do that work themselves is rather bizarre - b) intra-group solidarity is not a creation of "the media" but of historical facts of shared culture and interest (see: solidarity among groups of Asian-American immigrants despite the media virtually never caring about them)  and c) in practice, after its origination as an anodyne liberal sentiment, "All lives matter" became used by the same groups defending the use of deadly force by police officers.
Waaaaaaait a second...you say it's bizarre to ask minority activists to protest on behalf of people outside their group but then talk about "inter-group solidarity". Logic logic logic. (edit) Sorry, I notice now that you said "intra-group". In that case, with that kind of balkanization, why should ANYone care about what goes on outside their group?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on July 05, 2022, 07:18:12 AM
Quote from: DizzyD on July 05, 2022, 07:06:50 AM
Waaaaaaait a second...you say it's bizarre to ask minority activists to protest on behalf of people outside their group but then talk about "inter-group solidarity". Logic logic logic.

     A group that perceives they are being targeted for their distinctive characteristics will protest. Quite understandably inter-group solidarity comes after.

     From the get go I thought BLM meant "too", and I never considered it meant "more" or "only", or that more people in other groups should be shot more to even things up.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DavidW on July 05, 2022, 07:22:30 AM
Quote from: Todd on July 05, 2022, 06:32:42 AM
(https://www.statista.com/graphic/1/585152/people-shot-to-death-by-us-police-by-race.jpg)

What I really get out of this graph is that anyone trying to make any type of conclusion one way or the other based on their "research" is talking out of their butts since we have that gigantic "unknown" bar that could skew things either way.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on July 05, 2022, 07:22:58 AM
Quote from: drogulus on July 05, 2022, 07:18:12 AMFrom the get go I thought BLM meant "too", and I never considered it meant "more" or "only", or that more people in other groups should be shot more to even things up.

Indeed, that's just a bugbear for the white grievance cult.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 05, 2022, 07:24:32 AM
Quote from: drogulus on July 05, 2022, 07:18:12 AM
     A group that perceives they are being targeted for their distinctive characteristics will protest. Quite understandably inter-group solidarity comes after.
So the issue isn't really overreach by the police. It's a perception.

QuoteFrom the get go I thought BLM meant "too", and I never considered it meant "more" or "only", or that more people in other groups should be shot more to even things up.
I'm more interested in facts of individual cases, for example the Michael Brown case. "Hands up, don't shoot" wasn't factual, yet I remember hearing that over and over. Now it's deeply problematic to me that Michael Brown was shot six times. That to me is unnecessary force, and honestly I think some kind of charges and disciplinary action should've been brought against Darren Wilson. It's not always necessary to shoot to kill. However if you protest the killing of Brown or the shooting of Jacob Blake but yet think unarmed Ashli Babbitt had it coming, you have no consistent ethical ground on which to stand. Instead you have a political agenda.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on July 05, 2022, 07:38:25 AM
Quote from: DavidW on July 05, 2022, 07:22:30 AM
What I really get out of this graph is that anyone trying to make any type of conclusion one way or the other based on their "research" is talking out of their butts since we have that gigantic "unknown" bar that could skew things either way.

Criminology is a complex subject.  It involves other fields of social research and relates to other fields of inquiry.  It relies on data that takes months or years to be finalized based on adjusted information provided from decentralized sources using non-standardized methodologies.  There are some well-known trends and patterns - eg, non-Hispanic whites always make up the largest absolute number of any category of activity, non-whites are always disproportionately affected on a population basis, and socio-economic factors contribute substantially to the latter condition.  Measured, fact-based exchanges informed by recent research can be found online.  It is improbable that such exchanges will occur on a thread devoted to politics.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on July 05, 2022, 08:04:46 AM
A Pro-Choicer and a Pro-Lifer Do Lunch (https://www.thebulwark.com/a-pro-choicer-and-a-pro-lifer-do-lunch/)
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on July 05, 2022, 08:08:18 AM
Quote from: DizzyD on July 05, 2022, 07:24:32 AM
I'm more interested in facts of individual cases, for example the Michael Brown case. "Hands up, don't shoot" wasn't factual, yet I remember hearing that over and over. Now it's deeply problematic to me that Michael Brown was shot six times. That to me is unnecessary force, and honestly I think some kind of charges and disciplinary action should've been brought against Darren Wilson. It's not always necessary to shoot to kill. However if you protest the killing of Brown or the shooting of Jacob Blake but yet think unarmed Ashli Babbitt had it coming, you have no consistent ethical ground on which to stand. Instead you have a political agenda.

Don't recall about Michael Brown case.  Then there's Jayland Walker shot 60 times on June 27 in Akron: WTF?  60 times?

There was the case a few years ago in Toronto when a cop confronted a south Asian man with a knife on a city bus.  As I recall, he shot the guy 7 times and he died.  The cop was eventually convicted of attempted murder.  The guy was dead, why not murder?? ...

Well because the guy had gone down after 2 shots at least one fatal;  the cop then shot him 5 more times on the ground.  The first 2 shots were deem justified;  the subsequent 5 were not.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 05, 2022, 08:19:42 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on July 05, 2022, 08:08:18 AM
Don't recall about Michael Brown case.  Then there's Jayland Walker shot 60 times on June 27 in Akron: WTF?  60 times?

There was the case a few years ago in Toronto when a cop confronted a south Asian man with a knife on a city bus.  As I recall, he shot the guy 7 times and he died.  The cop was eventually convicted of attempted murder.  The guy was dead, why not murder?? ...

Well because the guy had gone down after 2 shots;  the cop then shot him 5 more times on the ground.  The first 2 shots were deem justified;  the subsequent 5 were not.
The question though is about whether such deadly force is appropriate. The south Asian man had a knife. Was he shot that many times because of his ethnicity or is it trigger-happiness on the part of the cops? Here's another interesting story from several years ago that I never heard about:

https://www.laweekly.com/an-unarmed-white-man-is-shot-by-a-cop-and-black-activists-rally/
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: fbjim on July 05, 2022, 08:20:37 AM
In the Shaver case the cop was acquitted despite the man being on the ground face down when he was shot. His explanation of the (drunken) man crawling towards him, which he had ordered him to do was "trying to gain a position of advantage in order to gain a better firing position on us"*. He was eventually re-instated by the police department.


*the use of militaristic euphemism-speak by police is a topic by itself, and the media's repetition of it has not been without its criticism.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: 71 dB on July 05, 2022, 08:22:13 AM
Quote from: DavidW on July 05, 2022, 07:22:30 AM
What I really get out of this graph is that anyone trying to make any type of conclusion one way or the other based on their "research" is talking out of their butts since we have that gigantic "unknown" bar that could skew things either way.

A lot of the 2021 and 2022 cases are probably "unknown", because they are not added properly into the statistics yet. It is also possible that the George Floyd incidence and the whole BLM thing following it has changed how the police keeps statistics.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on July 05, 2022, 08:28:27 AM
Quote from: DizzyD on July 05, 2022, 07:24:32 AM
So the issue isn't really overreach by the police. It's a perception.


     It's a well founded perception that police shoot black people at a higher rate, roughly twice their proportion in the population. The chart shows that, up until the last 2 years when the "unknown" category came to the rescue. Do unknown lives matter? I would say yes, but no one will protest for them, which might be the point.

Quote from: 71 dB on July 05, 2022, 08:22:13 AM
A lot of the 2021 and 2022 cases are probably "unknown", because they are not added properly into the statistics yet. It is also possible that the George Floyd incidence and the whole BLM thing following it has changed how the police keeps statistics.

     Yeah, maybe.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 05, 2022, 09:01:36 AM
Quote from: drogulus on July 05, 2022, 08:28:27 AM
     It's a well founded perception that police shoot black people at a higher rate, roughly twice their proportion in the population.
For lots of reasons, and not because black people are any more inherently criminal than any other group, black people are also disproportionately involved in crime. It is not racist to point that out. A century ago it probably would've been Irish and Italians in the metropolitan areas.
Quote

There is evidence in the official police-recorded figures that black Americans are more likely to commit certain types of crime than people of other races.

While it would be naïve to suggest that there is no racism in the US criminal justice system, victim reports don't support the idea that this is because of mass discrimination.

Higher poverty rates among various urban black communities might explain the difference in crime rates, although the evidence is mixed.

There are few simple answers and links between crime and race are likely to remain the subject of bitter argument.

https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-black-americans-commit-crime

QuoteThe chart shows that, up until the last 2 years when the "unknown" category came to the rescue. Do unknown lives matter? I would say yes, but no one will protest for them, which might be the point.
I think it's less about justice for many than it is about the usual tribalism.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on July 05, 2022, 09:45:39 AM
Quote from: DizzyD on July 05, 2022, 09:01:36 AM
For lots of reasons, and not because black people are any more inherently criminal than any other group, black people are also disproportionately involved in crime. It is not racist to point that out. A century ago it probably would've been Irish and Italians in the metropolitan areas.


     I think it has to do with encounters with the police in inherently stressful situations, not crime in general. I would have to look deeper at the kind of situations where police are likely to shoot, justified or not. Based only on media reports alone, I surmise that "shot while holding a sandwich" is rarer for whites. I don't think racism explains all of it, but the history of policing suggest that officers have an ingrained fear of black suspects that is prevalent among officers of all races. This has to do with the neighborhoods where the possibility of violent confrontations is rationally deemed to be higher than average.

     The question might be better resolved by asking why so few white suspects invoke a fear response in police officers. If you only normalize for neighborhood crime rates I still think there's a disparity in, say, "shot while running away". But I do think we need a finer grained breakdown of the circumstances of cases.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: coffee on July 05, 2022, 10:05:10 AM
Quote from: drogulus on July 05, 2022, 09:45:39 AM
     I think it has to do with encounters with the police in inherently stressful situations, not crime in general. I would have to look deeper at the kind of situations where police are likely to shoot, justified or not. Based only on media reports alone, I surmise that "shot while holding a sandwich" is rarer for whites. I don't think racism explains all of it, but the history of policing suggest that officers have an ingrained fear of black suspects that is prevalent among officers of all races. This has to do with the neighborhoods where the possibility of violent confrontations is rationally deemed to be higher than average.

     The question might be better resolved by asking why so few white suspects invoke a fear response in police officers. If you only normalize for neighborhood crime rates I still think there's a disparity in, say, "shot while running away". But I do think we need a finer grained breakdown of the circumstances of cases.

I have heard that in training-style simulations the general population of [white?] Americans shoot black suspects even more disproportionately than the police do. I don't mean that the police don't have a problem -- they do, if only because a police force needs to be perceived as legitimate by the population they're policing -- but I do suspect that the problem is much deeper and broader than policing, it's just that policing is where the rub hurts the most.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: fbjim on July 05, 2022, 10:06:28 AM
Well fear seems to be the watchword for police generally. You saw that in Uvalde, but more generally the liberal use of deadly force speaks to a mindset that one's life is in danger at all times.


I understand that policing is an inherently dangerous job (though not excessively so) but the culture seems to be a fear-based "shoot first" one, to the extent that Stephen Mader, a police officer in West Virginia talked a suicide-by-cop down, and was rewarded by being branded a "coward" by his fellow officers (despite not using lethal force seemingly being the more courageous option) and being fired.


Contrast that with Uvalde where a police department who were facing a situation where they had no control and no option to pre-emptively shoot first suddenly froze up.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on July 05, 2022, 10:20:01 AM
Quote from: fbjim on July 05, 2022, 10:06:28 AMI understand that policing is an inherently dangerous job (though not excessively so)

What does "not excessively so" mean, and is your definition objective?  I believe BLS data shows a fatality rate about four times higher than the average worker, though more dangerous professions like logger and commercial fisherman are much higher. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 05, 2022, 10:42:01 AM
Quote from: drogulus on July 05, 2022, 09:45:39 AM
     ...Based only on media reports alone, I surmise that "shot while holding a sandwich" is rarer for whites. ...
Except as usefulness for politically divisive rhetoric, I would say that's fairly rare for all groups. If that does happen to a white it's probably not going to get quite the same media coverage either.

QuoteThe question might be better resolved by asking why so few white suspects invoke a fear response in police officers. ...
Unless you're a police officer and work closely with them I don't know how you can say that they don't. Suspects are probably somewhat scary regardless.
Quote from: fbjim on July 05, 2022, 10:06:28 AM
...
Contrast that with Uvalde where a police department who were facing a situation where they had no control and no option to pre-emptively shoot first suddenly froze up.
That's b.s. This is similar to those deputies hiding in the bushes during the Parkland shooting.
QuotePolice responding to so-called active shooters have been trained for at least two decades to confront the assailants as soon as practical rather than wait for reinforcements, a practice that was developed amid countless mass killings across the US over the past two decades.

But instead of ordering officers to go in, Arredondo – who was on site at the school – reportedly had them wait while he called the city police force for reinforcements.

"We don't have enough firepower right now," Arredondo said, in part, according to a committee transcript of that call.

Arredondo also purportedly worried that the door to the classroom where the intruder was cornered had potentially been locked, and he couldn't immediately track down its key. But the door was in fact not locked – and even if it was, officers had a "hooligan" tool that could pry locked doors open, according to the committee's evidence.

Officers stormed the classroom 77 minutes into the attack and killed the gunman. But by then he had already murdered 21 and wounded 17 others.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jul/02/pete-arredondo-uvalde-school-district-police-chief-resign

By the way Mader was awarded a $175k settlement. And one of the Parkland dudes was reinstated with back pay.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on July 05, 2022, 12:12:51 PM
Jennifer Rubin: And the insane lies coming from Republicans are not only about Trump. The active purveyors of the "big lie," the vaccine deniers, the replacement theory provocateurs and the crowd that spun conspiracy theories about Ukraine when Trump was caught extorting its president are all either delusional or willing to pretend so. They are either hopelessly gullible or infinitely cynical.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: greg on July 05, 2022, 12:23:52 PM
Quote from: DizzyD on July 05, 2022, 06:22:02 AM
Nor probably did the media care enough to cover it thoroughly. Not enough potential for group vs group conflict.
Bingo.
Back a year or so ago, I shared a video of a cop outright murdering a white man when responding to a domestic disturbance call (IIRC he was yelling at a game, it might have been Crash Bandicoot) (full body cam). He thought the guy had a gun, but he didn't, so shot and killed him.
The story got local coverage (in Phoenix) but never got the extensive national coverage of George Floyd.
Because the USA is mostly anti-racist, people get more triggered when it's white cop vs. innocent black person. Which is reasonable to feel that way.
But the media purely capitalizes on this, airing the ragebait to get as much attention as possible. They could still show the George Floyd story but also show stories like that, evenly, but what exactly gives the media more attention?


Quote from: Herman on July 05, 2022, 12:08:03 AM
Just look at the real numbers. Police brutality affects minorities much more.
Never said it didn't.

Quote from: Herman on July 05, 2022, 12:08:03 AM
I, as a very white man with a top education could sweet talk myself out of bank robbery. A black Harvard professor famously got arrested for entering his own home.
Lol! I'd like to see you try.


Quote from: Herman on July 05, 2022, 12:08:03 AM
All Lives Matter was invented to void BLM, it is a typical right wing snark, and you're lapping it up because it suits you. The whole 'concepts' thing is BS.
Any proof of that, outside of lefty sources?
If it's common to understand it as something more inclusive, then it isn't just something that right-wingers use.
Does this looks right wing to you? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_Lives_Matter#/media/File:Defending_Portland_(34939466302)_(cropped).jpg
BLM could have avoided this problem by making their slogan "Black Lives Also Matter." BLAM.
But people don't know how to make good slogans.

Quote from: SimonNZ on July 04, 2022, 10:47:24 PM
Then you're wasting our time with a fear that is merely in your uninformed head.
Um, have you never heard of affirmative action? This has been discussed for many years now. Many people out there who want this.



Quote from: SimonNZ on July 04, 2022, 10:47:24 PM
I think you simply see a woman or black person doing a job and make assumptions about quotas without evidence.
Very typical unfounded leftist accusation that I've heard several times before. Yawn.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on July 05, 2022, 01:28:03 PM
Quote from: DizzyD on July 05, 2022, 10:42:01 AM
Except as usefulness for politically divisive rhetoric, I would say that's fairly rare for all groups. If that does happen to a white it's probably not going to get quite the same media coverage either.

Unless you're a police officer and work closely with them I don't know how you can say that they don't. Suspects are probably somewhat scary regardless.

     I think holding a sandwich or cellphone while shot gets coverage.

     I don't start a discussion of disparity by assuming there isn't one. It could be that whites don't get confronted by police in danger zones, or because they are less feared on average, or some of both.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 05, 2022, 01:40:56 PM
Quote from: drogulus on July 05, 2022, 01:28:03 PM
     I think holding a sandwich or cellphone while shot gets coverage.
I haven't heard of very many incidents like that either way. It would be wrong regardless of the victim's color.
QuoteI don't start a discussion of disparity by assuming there isn't one. It could be that whites don't get confronted by police in danger zones, or because they are less feared on average, or some of both.
The point is there's also a disparity concerning who might be in "danger zones". A commenter above mentioned the police shooting of a white guy in Phoenix. I looked it up, and it did happen. The guy's name was Ryan Whitaker. He did have a gun in his hand when he went to the door late at night after the cops knocked, but he put the gun down as soon as he realized they were cops. He was shot in the back and killed anyway. Incidentally that body cam footage is nightmare fuel.

I never heard about it until now. I'm sorry, but the media love to exacerbate racial ill-will. They just do. And those interracial instances are the ones that they will emphasize.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: geralmar on July 05, 2022, 01:43:52 PM
Reading these posts recalls to mind when I was a kid in the 1950s learning to read by studying the Sunday Detroit newspaper.  One story I read so many times one Sunday after another that  I asked my father about it was the fleeing "negro" man killed when the policeman's "warning shot" hit the suspect in the back or back of the head.  (I asked why the police marksmanship was so bad it invariably resulted in the death of the fugitive. Also, why would a warning shot be fired AT someone?)  Of course newspapers no longer automatically identify suspects by race and police have abandoned  the "warning shot" so I  guess society is so much better now. 
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on July 05, 2022, 02:09:40 PM
Quote from: DizzyD on July 05, 2022, 01:40:56 PM
I haven't heard of very many incidents like that either way. It would be wrong regardless of the victim's color.

The point is there's also a disparity concerning who might be in "danger zones". A commenter above mentioned the police shooting of a white guy in Phoenix. I looked it up, and it did happen. The guy's name was Ryan Whitaker. He did have a gun in his hand when he went to the door late at night after the cops knocked, but he put the gun down as soon as he realized they were cops. He was shot in the back and killed anyway.

I never heard about it until now. I'm sorry, but the media love to exacerbate racial ill-will. They just do. And those interracial instances are the ones that they will emphasize.

     If I wanted to exacerbate racial ill-will I could tell lies about how many black citizens are shot in questionable circumstances (holding something, running away etc.), or if I was really devious and ill-willed I could tell the truth about these incidents. I think the latter is safer and more effective. It might also be the case that media reports are usually cases of covering the crime and police beat, which everyone expects the media to do. I want to know if something disturbing like a shooting happens in my neighborhood, and I'm almost like a completely normal person.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 05, 2022, 02:13:55 PM
Quote from: drogulus on July 05, 2022, 02:09:40 PM
     If I wanted to exacerbate racial ill-will I could tell lies about how many black citizens are shot in questionable circumstances (holding something, running away etc.), or if I was really devious and ill-willed I could tell the truth about these incidents. I think the latter is safer and more effective. It might also be the case that media reports are usually cases of covering the crime and police beat, which everyone expects the media to do. I want to know if something disturbing like a shooting happens in my neighborhood, and I'm almost like a completely normal person.
You wouldn't have to tell lies. You can concentrate almost exclusively on white-on-black instances which obscures the fact the cops kill alot of white people, too. It's everybody's problem.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: drogulus on July 05, 2022, 02:54:31 PM
Quote from: DizzyD on July 05, 2022, 02:13:55 PM
You wouldn't have to tell lies. You can concentrate almost exclusively on white-on-black instances which obscures the fact the cops kill alot of white people, too. It's everybody's problem.

     No, you would have to suppress the truth and that's lying. It does happen to whites, and it is more of a problem for others, and that is both what statistics show and what the media reports. Do they also sensationalize? That depends on how you view their tendency to cover the worst cases and the ones where police violence is most questionable.

     If I'm an editor I wouldn't think it was my job to run compensatory stories about police brutality against whites. I wouldn't fiddle with the proportions to make or refute a point. If that's sensational so be it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 05, 2022, 03:26:26 PM
Quote from: drogulus on July 05, 2022, 02:54:31 PM
     No, you would have to suppress the truth and that's lying. It does happen to whites, and it is more of a problem for others, and that is both what statistics show and what the media reports. Do they also sensationalize? That depends on how you view their tendency to cover the worst cases and the ones where police violence is most questionable.

     If I'm an editor I wouldn't think it was my job to run compensatory stories about police brutality against whites. I wouldn't fiddle with the proportions to make or refute a point. If that's sensational so be it.
It wouldn't be compensatory; it would be perspective. If your concern is the truth rather than shaping opinion or serving an agenda, you'll provide it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 06, 2022, 03:34:16 AM
Quote from: milk on July 05, 2022, 03:22:35 AM
Don't be a goof.

I wasn't being one. It's a serious issue precisely because in the past people did basically say that black people were inherently more likely to be criminal.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 06, 2022, 03:35:21 AM
Quote from: DavidW on July 05, 2022, 07:22:30 AM
What I really get out of this graph is that anyone trying to make any type of conclusion one way or the other based on their "research" is talking out of their butts since we have that gigantic "unknown" bar that could skew things either way.

Why does the "unknown" bar grow so abruptly? That's curious. Does it really take that length of time to find out the answer?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: fbjim on July 06, 2022, 06:21:32 AM
Quote from: geralmar on July 05, 2022, 01:43:52 PM
Reading these posts recalls to mind when I was a kid in the 1950s learning to read by studying the Sunday Detroit newspaper.  One story I read so many times one Sunday after another that  I asked my father about it was the fleeing "negro" man killed when the policeman's "warning shot" hit the suspect in the back or back of the head.  (I asked why the police marksmanship was so bad it invariably resulted in the death of the fugitive. Also, why would a warning shot be fired AT someone?)  Of course newspapers no longer automatically identify suspects by race and police have abandoned  the "warning shot" so I  guess society is so much better now.


They're called "officer-involved shootings" now.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on July 06, 2022, 06:36:35 AM
Quote from: Madiel on July 06, 2022, 03:34:16 AM
I wasn't being one. It's a serious issue precisely because in the past people did basically say that black people were inherently more likely to be criminal.
Um, ya think? Why don't you reply to someone who's making those arguments? Not that I've noticed anyone around here in particular. I will offer you this advice: go watch Glenn Loury, noted black Professor of economics at Brown university, and John McWhorter, famous linguist at Columbia (and also black), discuss these issues in a short video (see below). They will articulate the opinions I've offered up but much more clearly and pointedly. I guess this will shock you. Then, comment on their videos. Accuse them of not knowing about racism (and maybe accuse them of being racist) and see what kind of reaction you get over there. I just want to see it. Please let us know afterwards and link us to it so we can see how the conversation went. I'm sure it'll be popcorn worthy.
Try this one (11:55):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFXT2dIQXJg
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on July 06, 2022, 06:54:19 AM
Quote from: Madiel on July 04, 2022, 03:39:54 PM
It is more complex than that and I have neither the time nor the inclination to thrash it out here.

There's a tone in some of your posts of suggesting that the higher rate of black deaths is THEIR fault, and maybe that it doesn't need to be fixed. Well in my view it does. Even IF it arises from higher crime rates (rather than just higher rates of police interactions) it still needs to be fixed.

The American attachment to the death penalty is a whole other issue, but even in America the legal view is that people are supposed to be put on trial for their crimes and punished after that. And the death penalty is not available for selling illegal cigarettes. It's certainly not available for a kid playing with a toy gun.

It's not only police but entire community attitudes. A black man in your neighbourhood? Call the police. A black man driving a fancy car? Call the police. It's a self perpetuating cycle of not just crimes being committed but of BELIEVING they're being committed. It also works the other way of characterising white misdemeanours as trivial and not meriting punishment.

Righto. I have work to do.

Yes, it's very complex, and involves "vicious circle" of cause & effect over time.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on July 06, 2022, 07:24:32 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on July 06, 2022, 06:54:19 AM
Yes, it's very complex, and involves "vicious circle" of cause & effect over time.

  • Blacks were enslaved in America from early in the 17th century 'till past the middle of the 19th.
    The vaunted US DofI and Constitution failed to recognize slaves as "created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness".
  • Vis-à-vis slaves, the US saw them first as property and only secondarily as human.  Rich southerners cultivated the notion of Blacks being inferior to justify their enslavement;  at the same time southern poor folks felt that, no matter how low their own circumstances, Blacks, at least, were lower.
  • The attitudes of slavery was inculcated in the minds of Whites and Blacks too, giving rise to "Jim Crow" and all subsequent discrimination.
  • Voting rights were effectively denied especially in southern state and Blacks, accordingly, were denied good education or access to various opportunities.  This state of affairs pretty much continued even for the many Blacks who migrated to northern cities.
  • Poor public education and lack of fair opportunities on the one hand, and discriminatory distain for Blacks on the other, resulted in the large majority of Blacks being forced to live in mainly Black areas.  Poverty perpetuates which was and is the case in these Black communities.
  • Poverty in Black communities, as in all communities, tends to crime and hence suspicion of crime by outsiders.
  • Black community members' crime and thus being suspected of crime  gives rise to relatively more interaction with police.  Blacks, of course, incur greater suspicion simply because of their obvious physical appearance.
  • Police, including Black police officers, are thus predisposed to suspect and fear Black individuals;  interactions are thus more frequent and prejudicial on the part of police.
  • Thus Blacks are more likely to unfairly treated or killed in interactions with police on account of there being more of them and police having a greater prejudicial attitude when they occur.
And none of this engages with Fryer, Loury, McWhorter, etc. there's also this vicious circle of liberals telling each other the same narratives and never engaging outside their bubbles. This is not to say that some of what you list isn't obviously, painfully obviously, true. Just that you don't take up points out of your comfort zone. Glenn Loury is going to say that you deny black people agency and responsibility. He's also going to say that you're also going to get a different view on this if you visit a church basement in an inner city, if you talk to family of children killed by the bullet of a gangbanger (since you seem to imply that black victims of crime are part of some sort of mirage) I don't give an answer. I just feel more and more inclined to admit a wider circle of views. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFXT2dIQXJg
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 06, 2022, 07:26:23 AM
Quote from: milk on July 06, 2022, 06:36:35 AM
Um, ya think? Why don't you reply to someone who's making those arguments? Not that I've noticed anyone around here in particular. I will offer you this advice: go watch Glenn Loury, noted black Professor of economics at Brown university, and John McWhorter, famous linguist at Columbia (and also black), discuss these issues in a short video (see below). They will articulate the opinions I've offered up but much more clearly and pointedly. I guess this will shock you. Then, comment on their videos. Accuse them of not knowing about racism (and maybe accuse them of being racist) and see what kind of reaction you get over there. I just want to see it. Please let us know afterwards and link us to it so we can see how the conversation went. I'm sure it'll be popcorn worthy.
Try this one (11:55):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFXT2dIQXJg
Very interesting video. Speaking of McWhorter, I also like his takedown of "hip hop culture" from nearly 20 years ago.

"At 2 AM on the New York subway not long ago, I saw another scene—more dispiriting than my KFC encounter with the rowdy rapping teens—that captures the essence of rap's destructiveness. A young black man entered the car and began to rap loudly—profanely, arrogantly—with the usual wild gestures. This went on for five irritating minutes. When no one paid attention, he moved on to another car, all the while spouting his doggerel. This was what this young black man presented as his message to the world—his oratory, if you will.

Anyone who sees such behavior as a path to a better future—anyone, like Professor Dyson, who insists that hip-hop is an urgent "critique of a society that produces the need for the thug persona"—should step back and ask himself just where, exactly, the civil rights–era blacks might have gone wrong in lacking a hip-hop revolution. They created the world of equality, striving, and success I live and thrive in.

Hip-hop creates nothing."

https://www.city-journal.org/html/how-hip-hop-holds-blacks-back-12442.html

If you want to get to root causes of disparities, you might also look into the cultural milieu that more or less glorifies that attitude and lifestyle. It's a little more complex than "because racism, duh".
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 06, 2022, 08:55:40 AM
Quote from: geralmar on July 06, 2022, 08:30:38 AM
I'm sure I'm not the first to notice that the mass shooters in the U.S. are almost always white.  I'm not talking about street crime shootings or shots between rival gangs, rather the firing indiscriminately from a rooftop or entering a classroom and slaughtering kids with gunfire.  In this regard whites seem to have the monopoly on "crazy".
Not really a monopoly.

"Between 1982 and July 2022, 70 out of the 132 mass shootings in the United States were carried out by white shooters. By comparison, the perpetrator was African American in 21 mass shootings, and Latino in 11. When calculated as percentages, this amounts to 53 percent, 16 percent, and eight percent respectively."

https://www.statista.com/statistics/476456/mass-shootings-in-the-us-by-shooter-s-race/

The shooter at Uvalde was Latino. The shooter at Parkland had been adopted by a Latino family. I don't know what his biological "race" is. The shooter in the Pulse nightclub case was of Afghan background. It's more interesting to me that these crimes are almost exclusively committed by males.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Fëanor on July 06, 2022, 10:33:09 AM
Quote from: milk on July 06, 2022, 07:24:32 AM

And none of this {see Feanor} engages with Fryer, Loury, McWhorter, etc. there's also this vicious circle of liberals telling each other the same narratives and never engaging outside their bubbles. This is not to say that some of what you list isn't obviously, painfully obviously, true. Just that you don't take up points out of your comfort zone. Glenn Loury is going to say that you deny black people agency and responsibility. He's also going to say that you're also going to get a different view on this if you visit a church basement in an inner city, if you talk to family of children killed by the bullet of a gangbanger (since you seem to imply that black victims of crime are part of some sort of mirage) I don't give an answer. I just feel more and more inclined to admit a wider circle of views. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFXT2dIQXJg

So you are taking it further than I said, (above), and I'm substantially agreeing.  You suggest Loury would say that I "deny black people agency and responsibility":  if it seemed that way I wasn't my intent.  My main message was there is a long history of circumstances behind the current situation of on-going discrimination towards Blacks.

A long history indeed and it isn't going to be remedied in a year or a decade.  Black people are going need to take a major role in that change.  What is the nature of that change?  It won't just be whining and protesting mistreatment, (though the will be a part of it).  It will require that Blacks step up and adapt their American subculture to the diverse, broader American reality and indeed, international reality.  As some Black Americans have said, Black communities in America need to put more value on education, work ethic, and family values.  (It seems to me that the success of Asians in American is because they are more developed in these regards.)  It won't be sufficient to demand respect of other American, the respect must also be earned.

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: LKB on July 06, 2022, 11:06:11 AM
Quote from: Fëanor on July 06, 2022, 10:33:09 AM
So you are taking it further than I said, (above), and I'm substantially agreeing.  You suggest Loury would say that I "deny black people agency and responsibility":  if it seemed that way I wasn't my intent.  My main message was there is a long history of circumstances behind the current situation of on-going discrimination towards Blacks.

A long history indeed and it isn't going to be remedied in a year or a decade.  Black people are going need to take a major role in that change.  What is the nature of that change?  It won't just be whining and protesting mistreatment, (though the will be a part of it).  It will require that Blacks step up and adapt their American subculture to the diverse, broader American reality and indeed, international reality.  As some Black Americans have said, Black communities in America need to put more value on education, work ethic, and family values.  (It seems to me that the success of Asians in American is because they are more developed in these regards.)  It won't be sufficient to demand respect of other American, the respect must also be earned.

+1
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Karl Henning on July 06, 2022, 12:23:05 PM
I hope I may be forgiven for querying (rhetorically) isn't that what we've seen from Trumpworld for years? Id est, whining white people who demand respect without the bother of earning it?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 06, 2022, 12:57:32 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on July 06, 2022, 12:23:05 PM
I hope I may be forgiven for querying (rhetorically) isn't that what we've seen from Trumpworld for years? Id est, whining white people who demand respect without the bother of earning it?
It looks like there's not much respect for much of anything, and it ain't just "Trumpworld". Confidence in TV news: 11%. In Congress: 7%.

"Americans are less confident in major U.S. institutions than they were a year ago, with significant declines for 11 of the 16 institutions tested and no improvements for any. The largest declines in confidence are 11 percentage points for the Supreme Court -- as reported in late June before the court issued controversial rulings on gun laws and abortion -- and 15 points for the presidency, matching the 15-point drop in President Joe Biden's job approval rating since the last confidence survey in June 2021."

https://news.gallup.com/poll/394283/confidence-institutions-down-average-new-low.aspx?utm_source=alert&utm_medium=email&utm_content=morelink&utm_campaign=syndication

Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 06, 2022, 01:31:47 PM
Quote from: milk on July 06, 2022, 06:36:35 AM
Um, ya think? Why don't you reply to someone who's making those arguments? Not that I've noticed anyone around here in particular. I will offer you this advice: go watch Glenn Loury, noted black Professor of economics at Brown university, and John McWhorter, famous linguist at Columbia (and also black), discuss these issues in a short video (see below). They will articulate the opinions I've offered up but much more clearly and pointedly. I guess this will shock you. Then, comment on their videos. Accuse them of not knowing about racism (and maybe accuse them of being racist) and see what kind of reaction you get over there. I just want to see it. Please let us know afterwards and link us to it so we can see how the conversation went. I'm sure it'll be popcorn worthy.
Try this one (11:55):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFXT2dIQXJg

You seem to have completely misunderstood the point of why I was saying it, and frankly I don't see the point of pursuing this discussion any further because the amount of time it will take is excessive given the progress in the discussion that will occur.

We aren't nearly as far apart on this as you seem to think. But the issue is one of emphasis. You seem very interested in explaining why black people die at the hands of police and emphasising how this isn't particularly due to anything the police are doing (though whether American police are poor on this in general compared to police in other countries, that's a whole OTHER question).

I'm more interested in pointing out that it's a bad outcome regardless of exactly why it's happening, and needs solving regardless. You can push the causal explanation back 2, 3, even 5 steps. You still haven't changed the acknowledged fact that black people are dying at a higher rate in encounters with police. Is this because they encounter police more often? Solve that. Is THIS because there's more crime in black neighbourhoods? Solve THAT.

At some point you either reach the endpoint of saying "that's just how black people are" or you reach a point where you identify a situation that's causing poorer outcomes for black people. Given your rejection of the proposition that black people are just going to be like this, you're left with the second option. That was my point. If we say it's not the fault of police, if we say it's not this that or the other... at SOME point you have to arrive at a problem that's worth taking responsibility for and fixing.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 06, 2022, 01:52:05 PM
Quote from: Madiel on July 06, 2022, 01:31:47 PM
Is this because they encounter police more often? Solve that. Is THIS because there's more crime in black neighbourhoods? Solve THAT.
Yes to both, probably. "Solve that" how? Great Society and War on Poverty Redux? That mindset played a huge part in creating the present situation.
It's undeniable that cops are too trigger-happy and shoot to kill when there's really no reason. Another case I came across that I had never heard about before last night is the 2015 case of a 59 year old white guy named David Kassick in PA (q.v.). The officer involved was found not guilty of murder. There may very well be evil white cops out there itching to blow away any black suspect they come across, but I think such officers are fortunately very very rare.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on July 06, 2022, 01:59:29 PM
Quote from: DizzyD on July 06, 2022, 07:26:23 AM
Very interesting video. Speaking of McWhorter, I also like his takedown of "hip hop culture" from nearly 20 years ago.

"At 2 AM on the New York subway not long ago, I saw another scene—more dispiriting than my KFC encounter with the rowdy rapping teens—that captures the essence of rap's destructiveness. A young black man entered the car and began to rap loudly—profanely, arrogantly—with the usual wild gestures. This went on for five irritating minutes. When no one paid attention, he moved on to another car, all the while spouting his doggerel. This was what this young black man presented as his message to the world—his oratory, if you will.

Anyone who sees such behavior as a path to a better future—anyone, like Professor Dyson, who insists that hip-hop is an urgent "critique of a society that produces the need for the thug persona"—should step back and ask himself just where, exactly, the civil rights–era blacks might have gone wrong in lacking a hip-hop revolution. They created the world of equality, striving, and success I live and thrive in.

Hip-hop creates nothing."

https://www.city-journal.org/html/how-hip-hop-holds-blacks-back-12442.html

If you want to get to root causes of disparities, you might also look into the cultural milieu that more or less glorifies that attitude and lifestyle. It's a little more complex than "because racism, duh".

A huge amount of white popular culture is the glorification of violence or living outside the law.

A huge amount of white music is "doggerel"
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 06, 2022, 02:11:02 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on July 06, 2022, 01:59:29 PM
A huge amount of white popular culture is the glorification of violence or living outside the law.

A huge amount of white music is "doggerel"
So what if it is? Does that kind of whataboutism invalidate the point?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 06, 2022, 02:15:42 PM
Quote from: DizzyD on July 06, 2022, 02:11:02 PM
So what if it is? Does that kind of whataboutism invalidate the point?

Well yes, it obviously does invalidate the point. Taking black doggerel as emblematic of black culture while not taking white doggerel as emblematic of white culture is basically a racist selection bias.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 06, 2022, 02:18:21 PM
Quote from: Madiel on July 06, 2022, 02:15:42 PM
Well yes, it obviously does invalidate the point. Taking black doggerel as emblematic of black culture while not taking white doggerel as emblematic of white culture is basically a racist selection bias.
I don't think anything was said about it being "emblematic". I think the question was one of influence and attitude. In fact what he's saying is that it *isn't* "emblematic". "White doggerel" is a red herring. There's nothing in what he wrote saying that white "pop culture" is superior. But I'd agree that something like the nihilism of punk rock is detrimental too, but that hasn't been a thing since what, the 80s? Actually the nihilistic tinge of today's "white" pop culture has been criticized as well. Nobody's saying it shouldn't be or that it's "better".
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 06, 2022, 02:24:09 PM
Quote from: DizzyD on July 06, 2022, 02:18:21 PM
I don't think anything was said about it being "emblematic". I think the question was one of influence and attitude. In fact what he's saying is that it *isn't* "emblematic". "White doggerel" is a red herring. There's nothing in what he wrote saying that white "pop culture" is superior.

So wait, there's a story about a single black man, which is spun into a wider discussion about such behaviour... and you don't think it's being used to symbolise blacks?

Interesting interpretative world you live in. Because I'd love to see what you would think if the story about the lousy individual simply wasn't there at the start. What is the POINT of that individual story, if not to get too to agree with a proposition about black people more generally?

Or is it just that you don't understand what "emblematic" means?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 06, 2022, 02:26:10 PM
Quote from: Madiel on July 06, 2022, 02:24:09 PM
So wait, there's a story about a single black man, which is spun into a wider discussion about such behaviour... and you don't think it's being used to symbolise blacks?

Interesting interpretative world you live in. Because I'd love to see what you would think if the story about the lousy individual simply wasn't there at the start. What is the POINT of that individual story, if not to get too to agree with a proposition about black people more generally?
Take it up with the author. As the commenter above said, I'd love to see it. Anyway isn't it pretty standard to do the same with racist attitudes? And where, pray tell, does it say anywhere in the article that hip hop is emblematic of black culture? And where, pray tell, is it said that "white" pop culture is somehow "better"?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on July 06, 2022, 02:38:41 PM
That was quite clearly implied.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 06, 2022, 02:45:52 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on July 06, 2022, 02:38:41 PM
That was quite clearly implied.
So nowhere, then. Thanks.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 06, 2022, 02:58:08 PM
Quote from: DizzyD on July 06, 2022, 02:26:10 PM
Take it up with the author. As the commenter above said, I'd love to see it. Anyway isn't it pretty standard to do the same with racist attitudes? And where, pray tell, does it say anywhere in the article that hip hop is emblematic of black culture? And where, pray tell, is it said that "white" pop culture is somehow "better"?

Do you understand what the word emblematic means?

It doesn't mean "an ideal to aspire to".

The problem with the article is that the proposition that black people don't live up to black ideals is not made true by including the word "black" in there.

If hip hop is NOT representative of black culture, then thoughts on hip hop are completely irrelevant.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 06, 2022, 03:04:36 PM
Quote from: Madiel on July 06, 2022, 02:58:08 PM
Do you understand what the word emblematic means?

It doesn't mean "an ideal to aspire to".

The problem with the article is that the proposition that black people don't live up to black ideals is not made true by including the word "black" in there.
Yeah, professor, I know what emblematic means. How's your reading comprehension? McWhorter's point in that article is that hip hop culture is a blight on and a drag on black culture. Can you see the distinction? Hip hop culture is not synonymous with black culture, which is what he appeals to in the peroration of that piece.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 06, 2022, 03:09:42 PM
Quote from: DizzyD on July 06, 2022, 03:04:36 PM
Yeah, professor, I know what emblematic means. How's your reading comprehension? McWhorter's point in that article is that hip hop culture is a blight on and a drag on black culture. Can you see the distinction? Hip hop culture is not synonymous with black culture, which is what he appeals to in the peroration of that piece.

Right. So black culture has to stop liking its bad bits in order to be better. Whereas white culture... well somehow white culture is getting by okay and coping with its drag. Or it just doesn't HAVE any drag.

The fact that you can't see the racism involved in this prescription is fascinating. Not least because picking some random guy as the symbol of hip hop, rather than the best and most powerful artists, is stunning selection bias.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 06, 2022, 03:11:33 PM
Quote from: Madiel on July 06, 2022, 03:09:42 PM
Right. So black culture has to stop liking its bad bits in order to be better. Whereas white culture... well somehow white culture is getting by okay and coping with its drag. Or it just doesn't HAVE any drag.
...
Where is that even implied? That's your imagination. Not everything is this black vs white system of values. He wasn't talking about "white culture", but his own. He might have a better handle on it than you do, assuming you're not black.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 06, 2022, 03:18:33 PM
It's pretty fucking obvious that if BLACK PEOPLE thought this rapper was any good, then he wouldn't be going from car to car on the subway.

So bringing him up is pointless. Right? He doesn't mean ANYTHING about anyone other than himself.

At which point the whole narrative collapses into an irrelevancy of one white guy who didn't like the rap of one black guy. Only the white guy has a bigger platform and can get you to quote him.

You keep asking for literal quotes, where does he say X. The question is rather the purpose of saying ANY of it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 06, 2022, 03:21:48 PM
Quote from: Madiel on July 06, 2022, 03:18:33 PM
It's pretty fucking obvious that if BLACK PEOPLE thought this rapper was any good, then he wouldn't be going from car to car on the subway.

So bringing him up is pointless. Right? He doesn't mean ANYTHING about anyone other than himself.

At which point the whole narrative collapses into an irrelevancy of one white guy who didn't like the rap of one black guy. Only the white guy has a bigger platform and can get you to quote him.

You keep asking for literal quotes, where does he say X. The question is rather the purpose of saying ANY of it.
Uh, yeah. You apparently didn't get past the first couple of paragraphs.

By the way, the author, John McWhorter, is a black academic.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 06, 2022, 03:29:52 PM
I stand corrected on his race. That doesn't alter the problem with the narrative.

Tell me, what is the point of mentioning the rapper?
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 06, 2022, 03:31:08 PM
Quote from: Madiel on July 06, 2022, 03:29:52 PM
I stand corrected on his race. That doesn't alter the problem with the narrative.

Tell me, what is the point of mentioning the rapper?
Read the article. And watch that short video someone else posted.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 06, 2022, 03:34:00 PM
Quote from: DizzyD on July 06, 2022, 03:31:08 PM
Read the article. And watch that short video someone else posted.

You must think there a point. You quoted it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 06, 2022, 03:34:47 PM
Quote from: Madiel on July 06, 2022, 03:34:00 PM
You must think there a point. You quoted it.
And it should be read, which is why I also included a link.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on July 06, 2022, 03:37:06 PM
Quote from: Madiel on July 06, 2022, 03:34:00 PM
You must think there a point. You quoted it.
You don't do your homework. And then you say you don't have the time and no one understand your point. It's a hard knock life.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 06, 2022, 03:41:23 PM
Quote from: milk on July 06, 2022, 03:37:06 PM
You don't do your homework. And then you say you don't have the time and no one understand your point. It's a hard knock life.
Well you see, I'm not at all suggesting that Madiel is racist at all, but this illustrates a racist or at least racialist view of reality. If someone expresses disdain for hip hop, they must be white, because surely a black person is going to love hip hop.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 06, 2022, 04:10:11 PM
Quote from: DizzyD on July 06, 2022, 03:34:47 PM
And it should be read, which is why I also included a link.

You misunderstand what I'm asking. It's not as if I don't have a view as to the point, but every time I or Simon express a view as to the point of the narrative about a black rapper and hip hop, you reject our view.

Reading the article will not tell me YOUR VIEW of the point of those paragraphs. And surely you think they have a point, otherwise your decision to quote them is exceptionally mysterious.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 06, 2022, 05:53:10 PM
Quote from: Madiel on July 06, 2022, 04:10:11 PM
...
Reading the article will not tell me YOUR VIEW of the point of those paragraphs. And surely you think they have a point, otherwise your decision to quote them is exceptionally mysterious.
Read the article first and we'll discuss it. Why did you and SimonNZ comment negatively on a video and article which neither of you gave much more than a quick glance? What do I think of the article? I find a lot of it makes sense, which is obviously why I quoted and linked it. Now am I supposed to condemn 80s hair bands and Tarantino films, Lady Gaga and death metal along with it? I'm cool with that.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on July 06, 2022, 07:32:40 PM
I was responding to the quote, which you chose to have stand alone or represent the article.

I've read the article now and find it another reheating I've been hearing since the PMRC days. The rest is the standard fear of youth culture and bebellion that could have been copy and pasted from the first month's of Elvis.

The only remarkable thing about it is that it's a black writer nostalgic for the pre civil rights days when black culture was all happy smiles, before nasty MalcolmX and Black Panthers came along and turned everyone angry.

This paragraph is a total facepalm:

"The idea that rap is an authentic cry against oppression is all the sillier when you recall that black Americans had lots more to be frustrated about in the past but never produced or enjoyed music as nihilistic as 50 Cent or N.W.A. On the contrary, black popular music was almost always affirmative and hopeful. Nor do we discover music of such violence in places of great misery like Ethiopia or the Congo—unless it's imported American hip-hop."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on July 06, 2022, 08:17:13 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on July 06, 2022, 07:32:40 PM
I was responding to the quote, which you chose to have stand alone or represent the article.

I've read the article now and find it another reheating I've been hearing since the PMRC days. The rest is the standard fear of youth culture and bebellion that could have been copy and pasted from the first month's of Elvis.

The only remarkable thing about it is that it's a black writer nostalgic for the pre civil rights days when black culture was all happy smiles, before nasty MalcolmX and Black Panthers came along and turned everyone angry.
Nostalgic for the pre civil rights days?
John McWhorter? That's an extremely dishonest reading of the article and a strangely intentional insult. Something makes me laugh at liberals pulling this king of thing (not that I'm not a liberal, I, like McWhorter, supported Obama twice). Next you'll be calling him an Uncle Tom. Well, that's really what you're doing. It's hard to take you seriously.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on July 06, 2022, 08:26:40 PM
No, its right there repeatedly in the text - like the bit I quoted above.

He seems to actually believe that happier black music was the product of a happier society. Not a hint that there was no means of putting their actual rage into commercial music at the time, without hiding it behind various forms of coded language, if even then. No way of having it produced, no way of having it heard. No way of performing it without risking harm.

From the article:

"The venom that suffuses rap had little place in black popular culture—indeed, in black attitudes—before the 1960s. The hip-hop ethos can trace its genealogy to the emergence in that decade of a black ideology that equated black strength and authentic black identity with a militantly adversarial stance toward American society. In the angry new mood, captured by Malcolm X's upraised fist, many blacks (and many more white liberals) began to view black crime and violence as perfectly natural, even appropriate, responses to the supposed dehumanization and poverty inflicted by a racist society. Briefly, this militant spirit, embodied above all in the Black Panthers, infused black popular culture, from the plays of LeRoi Jones to "blaxploitation" movies, like Melvin Van Peebles's Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song, which celebrated the black criminal rebel as a hero."
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 06, 2022, 08:33:44 PM
Quote from: DizzyD on July 06, 2022, 05:53:10 PM
Read the article first and we'll discuss it. Why did you and SimonNZ comment negatively on a video and article which neither of you gave much more than a quick glance? What do I think of the article? I find a lot of it makes sense, which is obviously why I quoted and linked it. Now am I supposed to condemn 80s hair bands and Tarantino films, Lady Gaga and death metal along with it? I'm cool with that.

Like Simon, I was responding to the quote. I didn't comment on a video or article, I commented on the material that someone else chose to present.

And no, I don't expect you to condemn any of those things, unless you want to run the argument that they represent white culture and are adversely affecting whites.

Now if you'll excuse me, all of this discussion has reminded me that I haven't listened to Janelle Monae for a while. Black, female, queer, and in my personal opinion a freaking genius. For one thing she keeps making me like rap!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on July 06, 2022, 08:41:39 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on July 06, 2022, 08:26:40 PM
No, its right there repeatedly in the text - like the bit I quoted above.

He seems to actually believe that happier black music was the product of a happier society. Not a hint that there was no means of putting their actual rage into commercial music at the time, without hiding it behind various forms of coded language, if even then. No way of having it produced, no way of having it heard. No way of performing it without risking harm.

From the article:

"The venom that suffuses rap had little place in black popular culture—indeed, in black attitudes—before the 1960s. The hip-hop ethos can trace its genealogy to the emergence in that decade of a black ideology that equated black strength and authentic black identity with a militantly adversarial stance toward American society. In the angry new mood, captured by Malcolm X's upraised fist, many blacks (and many more white liberals) began to view black crime and violence as perfectly natural, even appropriate, responses to the supposed dehumanization and poverty inflicted by a racist society. Briefly, this militant spirit, embodied above all in the Black Panthers, infused black popular culture, from the plays of LeRoi Jones to "blaxploitation" movies, like Melvin Van Peebles's Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song, which celebrated the black criminal rebel as a hero."
You feel he omits causes of the supposed lack of venom or expression of anger in pre-60s black music. Therefore he's an Uncle Tom, nostalgic for the happy days of Jim Crow. Got it. You should let Columbia know about this.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on July 06, 2022, 08:48:58 PM
Well, do you agree with him in the bit I bolded or the paragraph. I think it's a pretty jaw dropping misreading of all the historical evidence and I'm certainly not going to be seeking out articles by someone so I'll Informed.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 06, 2022, 09:03:51 PM
I don't know whether he's ill informed or not. I do know I found him to be a profoundly irritating podcast host who ruined what had previously been one of my favourite shows... which speaks to his communication skills rather than his knowledge. Though the primary issue was that he consistently came across as very self-satisfied about his level of knowledge.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on July 06, 2022, 10:10:18 PM
Quote from: SimonNZ on July 06, 2022, 08:48:58 PM
Well, do you agree with him in the bit I bolded or the paragraph. I think it's a pretty jaw dropping misreading of all the historical evidence and I'm certainly not going to be seeking out articles by someone so I'll Informed.
I don't know if I agree. It's not an area I'm interested in much. John McWhorter is smarter than me and you, that's for sure. Is he right about this issue? I've no idea. Rap music does seem nihilistic but I haven't looked into it that deeply. I guess there is a lot of angst in blues but it's not nihilism, maybe not "venom." I would have to spend a lot more time with the article and musicology. It's dense and I'm not going to just dismiss it. I'm not going to speak for people in the black community about such deeply fraught issues. I could speculate that there is a divide here between MLK types and Malcolm X types on ideals and philosophy but I could be totally off on that since I haven't studied it and I would have to ask. That could be part of what's going on here. I wouldn't assume all black people agree on this stuff. This all seems like a diversion; better engage the topic. There are many reasonable public people, with reasonable arguments, that just disagree with the liberal view of race and crime or "woke" politics. Glenn Loury is another academic. Jamil Jivani is a public figure who has been very critical of BLM. So is Brittany King. Coleman Hughes has very strong arguments and he's another good communicator. He's testified before Congress. Roland Fryer's work is controversial, but anything in this area is bound to be.

This is another video that would be a shock to liberals! People of color discussing "race, riots, and the police" from a (non?)critical perspective. They aren't white and they aren't liberals. Fancy that: https://youtu.be/D2vctUezliE
(Jason Riley, Coleman Hughes, Jamil Jivani and Rafael Magual)
Quote from: Madiel on July 06, 2022, 09:03:51 PM
he consistently came across as very self-satisfied about his level of knowledge.

Mmmm...one wouldn't want to come across that way 🤔
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 07, 2022, 04:54:09 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on July 06, 2022, 08:48:58 PM
Well, do you agree with him in the bit I bolded or the paragraph. I think it's a pretty jaw dropping misreading of all the historical evidence and I'm certainly not going to be seeking out articles by someone so I'll Informed.
Yeah, in part. Are you "well-informed"? I don't sense that sort of "venom" in Duke Ellington or Motown. What you're essentially saying is that to be "really black and free" requires generous doses of venom and hostility. I don't think that's been established.
Quote from: Madiel on July 06, 2022, 09:03:51 PM
Though the primary issue was that he consistently came across as very self-satisfied about his level of knowledge.
Well you and Simon there seem to suffer the same malady. The difference being that McWhorter does have some qualifications.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 07, 2022, 05:05:00 AM
Quote from: DizzyD on July 07, 2022, 04:54:09 AM
The difference being that McWhorter does have some qualifications.

In linguistics. There's been a whole other thread where someone else has been telling me that you have to have the right kind of qualifications, whereas apparently here just having qualifications is enough.

I've got some qualifications. I actually have qualifications in three different fields of study. None of which are relevant to the issue at hand particularly, but hey, I do have some qualifications.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 07, 2022, 05:15:18 AM
Quote from: Madiel on July 07, 2022, 05:05:00 AM
In linguistics. There's been a whole other thread where someone else has been telling me that you have to have the right kind of qualifications, whereas apparently here just having qualifications is enough.
Linguistics is about communication. It seems to be fairly germane to the topic.

QuoteI've got some qualifications. I actually have qualifications in three different fields of study. None of which are relevant to the issue at hand particularly, but hey, I do have some qualifications.
Well then you should know better than to comment on and judge an article before actually reading it.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 07, 2022, 05:21:43 AM
Quote from: DizzyD on July 07, 2022, 05:15:18 AM
Well then you should know better than to comment on and judge an article before actually reading it.

I did not comment on the article. You really don't seem to have registered that.

I commented on the quote. The quote you selected. And my comment has absolutely nothing to do with "knowledge" anyway, it has to do with the obvious logical problems of trying to move from a narrative about a single jerk rapping on the subway to a generalisation about an entire musical genre through to an even bigger statement about what ails African-Americans.

My job in fact involves an awful lot of logic and analysis. Which is pretty much why I can drive a truck through gaping logical holes. I might well find things in "the article" that I agree with or find worthy of consideration, but your insistence that I've somehow managed to comment on an article that I've never seen is a really really bad piece of logic. You know damn well what I commented on. Stop suggesting that I performed the miraculous feat of commenting on material other than the material that you provided, and stop assuming that my comment had anything to do with the material that you didn't provide. I never claimed I was commenting on the article, it's you who keeps saying that over and over despite it being incredibly obvious that it isn't true.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on July 07, 2022, 05:25:32 AM
Quote from: DizzyD on July 07, 2022, 04:54:09 AM
Yeah, in part. Are you "well-informed"? I don't sense that sort of "venom" in Duke Ellington or Motown. What you're essentially saying is that to be "really black and free" requires generous doses of venom and hostility.

I'm not saying anything of the sort. I'm saying that any black musician in the pre Civil rights era who wanted to express their real outrage at racism in their music had no possibility of doing so. McWhorter seems to think that because it's not found in the music that that somehow shows that outrage wasn't felt by the musicians.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: fbjim on July 07, 2022, 05:25:45 AM
Quote from: milk on July 06, 2022, 10:10:18 PM
John McWhorter is smarter than me and you, that's for sure. Is he right about this issue? I've no idea

He isn't.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on July 07, 2022, 05:27:17 AM
Quote from: Madiel on July 07, 2022, 05:05:00 AM
In linguistics. There's been a whole other thread where someone else has been telling me that you have to have the right kind of qualifications, whereas apparently here just having qualifications is enough.

I've got some qualifications. I actually have qualifications in three different fields of study. None of which are relevant to the issue at hand particularly, but hey, I do have some qualifications.
John Hamilton McWhorter V (/məkˈhwɔːrtər/;[1] born October 6, 1965) is an American linguist with a specialty in creole languages, sociolects, and Black English. He is currently associate professor of linguistics at Columbia University,[2] where he also teaches American studies and music history.[3][4] He is the author of books on race relations, hip-hop and African-American culture.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McWhorter
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 07, 2022, 05:28:59 AM
Quote from: Madiel on July 07, 2022, 05:21:43 AM
I did not comment on the article. You really don't seem to have registered that.

I commented on the quote. The quote you selected. And my comment has absolutely nothing to do with "knowledge" anyway, it has to do with the obvious logical problems of trying to move from a narrative about a single jerk rapping on the subway to a generalisation about an entire musical genre through to an even bigger statement about what ails African-Americans.

My job in fact involves an awful lot of logic and analysis. Which is pretty much why I can drive a truck through gaping logical holes. I might well find things in "the article" that I agree with or find worthy of consideration, but your insistence that I've somehow managed to comment on an article that I've never seen is a really really bad piece of logic. You know damn well what I commented on. Stop suggesting that I performed the miraculous feat of commenting on material other than the material that you provided...
I provided a link also to the rest of the article, and you couldn't even get the guy's racial group right. You didn't use your awesome skills of logic to dissect anything in the couple of paragraphs or the article as whole beyond your mistaken perception of a white guy being upset over a black guy rapping in a KFC and subway car.

Here's another McWhorter article to mull over, which seems pretty logically sound to me, even this isolated paragraph. But please take the trouble to read the whole thing before jumping in head first:

"First, it's time for well-intentioned whites to stop pardoning as 'understandable' the worst of human nature whenever black people exhibit it. The person one pities is a person one may like but does not truly respect. Certainly whites must keep extirpating vestiges of racism, even within their own souls. But for David Howard to concur with his firing by Washington mayor Anthony Williams for using the word 'niggardly' is condescension, not compassion; for Nathan Glazer to reverse his longstanding opposition to affirmative action because whites 'owe' black people is to cast blacks as characters in a morality play, not to usher living human beings out of a historically conditioned wariness of school."

https://www.city-journal.org/html/what%E2%80%99s-holding-blacks-back-12025.html
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 07, 2022, 05:30:52 AM
Quote from: milk on July 07, 2022, 05:27:17 AM
John Hamilton McWhorter V (/məkˈhwɔːrtər/;[1] born October 6, 1965) is an American linguist with a specialty in creole languages, sociolects, and Black English. He is currently associate professor of linguistics at Columbia University,[2] where he also teaches American studies and music history.[3][4] He is the author of books on race relations, hip-hop and African-American culture.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McWhorter

That doesn't tell me what his qualifications in hip-hop are, apart from apparently hating it.

Seriously, I've just had another thread where someone repeatedly intimated that Hurwitz is not qualified to have a meaningful opinion on musicology despite being a qualified historian as well as a professional music reviewer. So I would prefer to know what his actual qualifications are related to American studies, music history, race relations and so on, rather than just being told that he talks about them a lot.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: fbjim on July 07, 2022, 05:32:35 AM
John Hamilton McWhorter V is entitled to say whatever idiotic things he wants about hip-hop and how angry he was at a rapper on the subway - his qualifications do not constitute an argument.


And frankly anyone who listens to someone with a roman numeral at the end of their name on the topic of hip-hop has something coming.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Todd on July 07, 2022, 05:33:05 AM
From the Gray Lady: The Rise of the Far-Right Latina (https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/06/us/politics/mayra-flores-latina-republicans.html)

This is what happens when the right type of person with the wrong types of views wins an election.  A Mexican-born citizen who wins office apparently cannot be labeled conservative, she (and they) must be labeled "far-right".  I wonder if she or the other fearsome "far-right" Latinas cited in the most august of news sources will make common cause with white nationalists.  The continued, inadvertent dilution of a once potent political phrase will be helpful, though.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on July 07, 2022, 05:37:55 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on July 07, 2022, 05:25:32 AM
I'm not saying anything of the sort. I'm saying that any black musician in the pre Civil rights era who wanted to express their real outrage at racism in their music had no possibility of doing so. McWhorter seems to think that because it's not found in the music that that somehow shows that outrage wasn't felt by the musicians.
You think McWhorter is saying that black people weren't outraged at racism before the 60s? I really think you are not understanding the words. Or, more likely, you're trying to find a meaning in them, perhaps unconsciously, that you can can stomp your foot on. I assure you, John McWhorter knows better than you, far better, that black people were outraged by racism. He's talking about something specific, a kind of militancy. He may be right or wrong but he's not saying what you say he's saying. This is the second time you've written in your own straw man. I just think you're being silly.   

Quote from: fbjim on July 07, 2022, 05:25:45 AM
He isn't.
:P You shouldn't have
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 07, 2022, 05:39:48 AM
Quote from: Todd on July 07, 2022, 05:33:05 AM
From the Gray Lady: The Rise of the Far-Right Latina (https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/06/us/politics/mayra-flores-latina-republicans.html)

This is what happens when the right type of person with the wrong types of views wins an election.  A Mexican-born citizen who wins office apparently cannot be labeled conservative, she (and they) must be labeled "far-right".  I wonder if she or the other fearsome "far-right" Latinas cited in the most august of news sources will make common cause with white nationalists.  The continued, inadvertent dilution of a once potent political phrase will be helpful, though.
I wonder why no one is ever described in the media as "far left" or really any kind of "left".

Quote from: Madiel on July 07, 2022, 05:30:52 AM
That doesn't tell me what his qualifications in hip-hop are, apart from apparently hating it.

Seriously, I've just had another thread where someone repeatedly intimated that Hurwitz is not qualified to have a meaningful opinion on musicology despite being a qualified historian as well as a professional music reviewer. So I would prefer to know what his actual qualifications are related to American studies, music history, race relations and so on, rather than just being told that he talks about them a lot.
I didn't say anything about Hurwitz' qualifications. I said being an expert in modern European history doesn't in itself make you a musicologist. Actually I think Hurwitz' musical background qualifies him to speak on musicological subjects. Sometimes I agree with him, sometimes I don't. He has some interesting takes.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on July 07, 2022, 05:39:59 AM
Quote from: fbjim on July 07, 2022, 05:32:35 AM
John Hamilton McWhorter V is entitled to say whatever idiotic things he wants about hip-hop and how angry he was at a rapper on the subway - his qualifications do not constitute an argument.


And frankly anyone who listens to someone with a roman numeral at the end of their name on the topic of hip-hop has something coming.
Now there's an argument! You go girl!
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: Madiel on July 07, 2022, 05:44:07 AM
Quote from: DizzyD on July 07, 2022, 05:28:59 AM
I provided a link also to the rest of the article, and you couldn't even get the guy's racial group right. You didn't use your awesome skills of logic to dissect anything in the couple of paragraphs or the article as whole beyond your mistaken perception of a white guy being upset over a black guy rapping in a KFC and subway car.

Explain how his race has anything to do with it, or protects him from logical problems. Explain how a black guy being upset over a single rapper, who clearly isn't a particularly popular rapper, is any different. Explain how the race of the observer was relevant to anything that I said.

Actually, don't. This is utterly tiresome. The whole notion that a black guy must be right is a fallacy (not least because not all black guys agree with each other on this stuff, which is pretty much why McWhorter has an audience for this stuff). You literally refuse to tell me what the point of the story about the black rapper is, even though you're the one who chose to select that part. You reject any claim that McWhorter is trying to use the rapper to symbolise something more general, when that is the only thing that makes telling the story of the black rapper have any fucking point whatsoever.

That's literally as far as we got. You keep demanding that I read an article, for what? What is going to be achieved by reading lots more paragraphs and telling you what I think about them when you can't even cope with really basic points about the handful paragraphs that you personally selected for display? It's going to be such a colossal fucking waste of time. Seriously. Sure, I can spend a little bit of time reading the article, and might well do so, but engaging in discussion with you about it, here? Absolute fucking waste of time. Even with prompting, you cannot indicate what YOU think the point is of the material that YOU selected as a highlight of the article. You just know that you like the conclusion of the article and we're all just supposed to shut up as a result.

It's no wonder that here on a classical forum we can find people who like an argument that is based on certain kinds of music being bad music. But that doesn't make it a good argument, any more than any of the other "pop music is bad" arguments I've seen on this forum over the years. The fact that this time around it's specifically 'black' pop music that's bad doesn't make it a better argument, and your willing offer to throw various kinds of 'white' pop music under the bus if it would help was just downright embarrassing.

McWhorter acknowledges an alternative view of the value of hip-hop just so that he can reject it. And so what? Because he has a negative view of it, and you don't like it, he's right, and the black scholars who argue for the value of it are wrong? Oh, okay then.

An argument based on artistic taste is just pathetic.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 07, 2022, 05:46:34 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on July 07, 2022, 05:25:32 AM
I'm not saying anything of the sort. I'm saying that any black musician in the pre Civil rights era who wanted to express their real outrage at racism in their music had no possibility of doing so. McWhorter seems to think that because it's not found in the music that that somehow shows that outrage wasn't felt by the musicians.
That is what you're saying. Showing "outrage" or "venom" is an indication of black artistic freedom, and the reason we didn't see it in Scott Joplin or Dizzy Gillespie is because they were constrained by whites. A really irritating thing to me is constantly considering black people almost exclusively in terms of their relations with whites.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: fbjim on July 07, 2022, 05:47:12 AM
To be blunt it reminds me of the "rap is just b*tches and bling" statements which more or less just betray either a lack of knowledge of any music since about 2002, or bad taste. Hip-hop is, like rock music, ideologically diverse, and has changed significantly over time. There's no "hip-hop monoculture" which happens to be defined by 90s gangsta rap.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on July 07, 2022, 05:48:43 AM
Quote from: milk on July 07, 2022, 05:37:55 AM
You think McWhorter is saying that black people weren't outraged at racism before the 60s? I really think you are not understanding the words. Or, more likely, you're trying to find a meaning in them, perhaps unconsciously, that you can can stomp your foot on. I assure you, John McWhorter knows better than you, far better, that black people were outraged by racism. He's talking about something specific, a kind of militancy. He may be right or wrong but he's not saying what you say he's saying. This is the second time you've written in your own straw man. I just think you're being silly.   

:P You shouldn't have

If I'm misreading him it's due to a lack of clarity and suggestions in his own writing,. And I don't see how that in any way qualifies as creating a "strawman".
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: DizzyD on July 07, 2022, 05:50:40 AM
QuoteYou reject any claim that McWhorter is trying to use the rapper to symbolise something more general,
I didn't say that. I said he's not saying that, as you put it, a guy rapping on a subway car is "emblematic of black culture". Now I'm not going to play these little semantic games to aid you in saving face.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: SimonNZ on July 07, 2022, 05:53:37 AM
Quote from: DizzyD on July 07, 2022, 05:39:48 AM
I wonder why no one is ever described in the media as "far left" or really any kind of "left".


Lol. I see McWhorter Atlantic articles are heavily peppered with unironic use of the words "woke left".
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: fbjim on July 07, 2022, 05:58:42 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on July 07, 2022, 05:53:37 AM
Lol. I see McWhorter Atlantic articles are heavily peppered with unironic use of the words "woke left".

Talking about the various foibles of whatever "the left" is has always been a pastime of center-liberal publications like the NYT and The Atlantic - if the "actual" far-left are mentioned less often it is because they are not relevant in national politics. The Democratic party leadership is still defined by 70-and-80 year olds expressing liberal ideology from the Clinton era - the equivilent of what happened to the Republican party is if a fringe left-wing group like the Lyndon Larouche people took over the national party apparatus a la Trump.

Most of the "left-wing" people who have any involvement in national politics would be at home in social-democratic or European-style Green parties.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on July 07, 2022, 06:01:58 AM
Quote from: Madiel on July 07, 2022, 05:44:07 AM
Explain how his race has anything to do with it, or protects him from logical problems. Explain how a black guy being upset over a single rapper, who clearly isn't a particularly popular rapper, is any different. Explain how the race of the observer was relevant to anything that I said.

Actually, don't. This is utterly tiresome. The whole notion that a black guy must be right is a fallacy (not least because not all black guys agree with each other on this stuff, which is pretty much why McWhorter has an audience for this stuff). You literally refuse to tell me what the point of the story about the black rapper is, even though you're the one who chose to select that part. You reject any claim that McWhorter is trying to use the rapper to symbolise something more general, when that is the only thing that makes telling the story of the black rapper have any fucking point whatsoever.

That's literally as far as we got. You keep demanding that I read an article, for what? What is going to be achieved by reading lots more paragraphs and telling you what I think about them when you can't even cope with really basic points about the handful paragraphs that you personally selected for display? It's going to be such a colossal fucking waste of time. Seriously. Sure, I can spend a little bit of time reading the article, and might well do so, but engaging in discussion with you about it, here? Absolute fucking waste of time. Even with prompting, you cannot indicate what YOU think the point is of the material that YOU selected as a highlight of the article. You just know that you like the conclusion of the article and we're all just supposed to shut up as a result.

It's no wonder that here on a classical forum we can find people who like an argument that is based on certain kinds of music being bad music. But that doesn't make it a good argument, any more than any of the other "pop music is bad" arguments I've seen on this forum over the years. The fact that this time around it's specifically 'black' pop music that's bad doesn't make it a better argument, and your willing offer to throw various kinds of 'white' pop music under the bus if it would help was just downright embarrassing.

McWhorter acknowledges an alternative view of the value of hip-hop just so that he can reject it. And so what? Because he has a negative view of it, and you don't like it, he's right, and the black scholars who argue for the value of it are wrong? Oh, okay then.

An argument based on artistic taste is just pathetic.
I actually feel a little regret here. You're tone is so angry and dismissive but I'm not blameless. This is totally unproductive. I think the original topic that got this going is worth discussing: race and crime in the U.S., in the context of U.S. politics. These back and forth-s start to sink to where everyone's looking for balls of dirt to throw and nothing more. There's another way to go about this where the stakes aren't who wins this round. I really do think it's possible to discuss these issues without so much drama. Personally, I don't assume I'm right about everything and I think it's a good idea to spend at least some time exploring why people believe what they believe and what would make them change their minds.
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: milk on July 07, 2022, 06:21:34 AM
Quote from: SimonNZ on July 07, 2022, 05:48:43 AM
If I'm misreading him it's due to a lack of clarity and suggestions in his own writing,. And I don't see how that in any way qualifies as creating a "strawman".
Well, I see you believe very strongly that this is the case. Is there a chance that you might feel differently upon rereading it another time? Do you feel there's anything at stake here, ego-wise? You see I sense that there's more to this and that admitting there might be some nuance here would be slightly humiliating. Of course, you could throw the same charge at me. That's OK, I can take it. I just don't see McWhorter saying black people weren't outraged about racism before the 60s. Not in the piece or anywhere else. I think it's absurd.
Quote from: fbjim on July 07, 2022, 05:47:12 AM
To be blunt it reminds me of the "rap is just b*tches and bling" statements which more or less just betray either a lack of knowledge of any music since about 2002, or bad taste. Hip-hop is, like rock music, ideologically diverse, and has changed significantly over time. There's no "hip-hop monoculture" which happens to be defined by 90s gangsta rap.
There are all sorts of ways you can dismiss him by misreading what he's saying. It's a trick. "...it reminds me of..." "Hey John, you mean all rap music is about guns and rape?" "Why yes I do lovey..." BTW you reminded me of De La Soul, the one Hip Hop album I owned way back. Kind of stoner hip hop. I think my problem with Hip Hop is that it's so nerdy. It's all about the ins and outs of technology. Music for Djs and headphones and beats. It's not just hip hop that's like that of course. I think around the 80s, all popular music started sliding slowly away from that human touch. But I digress...
Title: Re: USA Politics (redux)
Post by: fbjim on July 07, 2022, 06:28:20 AM
I'm not sure who said it - Jack White, maybe? But a quote I always liked went something like - "If there's emotion missing in electronic music, it's because someone didn't put it in".

In other words I don't really think electronic music (and hip-hop, to be clear, is - electronic music by lineage) is by nature any less "human" or emotive than other genres, but it does depend on what one hopes to get out of music.

Actually I rather like this quote from the KLF -

QuoteSo why don't all songs sound the same? Why are some artists great, write dozens of classics that move you to tears, say it like it's never been said before, make you laugh, dance, blow your mind, fall in love, take to the streets and riot? Well, it's because although the chords, notes, harmonies, beats and words have all been used before their own soul shines through; their personality demands attention. This doesn't just come via the great vocalist or virtuoso instrumentalist. The Techno sound of Detroit, the most totally linear programmed music ever, lacking any human musicianship in its execution reeks of sweat, sex and desire. The creators of that music just press a few buttons and out comes - a million years of pain and lust.