US Politics Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ric
  • Start date Start date
BlueMoonAcrossThePond said:
The comparison is apt because he was the last President who committed crimes while in office that would rise to the level of impeachable offense in a non-partisan weighing of fact.

I agree with your assessment of the Republican party - but the party representation reflects the will of Republicans - Republicans voted these candidates into office.

How did this come to pass? How is it that Republicans now support amoral, mendacious - and in some cases - criminals or would-be criminals? What happened to the centrist Republican? Are centrists still the majority but they're going to vote Republican because they always have? Or has America changed since the 1970's - and the centrist Republican is a rare species.

The state of the Republican party is due to a complex confluence of many events, and it's not just Trump.
Click to expand...
To answer my own question...

After some thought I think that rural Americans have, for generations, been very suspicious of government and distrustful of legacy media - by which I mean TV broadcasts over air, before even cable was available, consisting of ABC, NBC and CBS. Rural Americans moreover tended to be religious - and even if not religious were very conservative. Moreover, many of them were either slightly racist or very racist, and almost none of them were favorably disposed towards non-heterosexual relations, even those who weren't religious.

Rural Americans in decades past got their news from newspapers and from the big three broadcasters which reported the news factually albeit with a left-leaning bias.

Hence when Nixon was impeached, Republicans writ large were outraged.

Fast forward to the present era - so-called news broadcasts are available from numerous sources. Moreover, Fox News has emerged for aging luddites stuck in the cable news era. Now, rural Americans - as indeed everyone - can watch news or so-called news broadcasts that perfectly mesh with their sentiments. This reinforces their ideas as truthful even if ridiculously counter-factual.

And thus, Trump's failings are easily dismissed as either untruthful, made-up left wing attacks, or as momentary lapses of judgement not reflective of his true character.

Can Democracy in America survive given the status quo in free speech - where one is free to lie about most things - lawsuits seem to be the only curb - free of consequence? In which, basically 1/2 of Americans are tuned into a false narrative?

And honestly, I think that most Republican voters don't frankly care what's true. They've been indoctrinated into an us-versus-them mentality where calamity is just around the corner unless they vote Republican.

TL/DR - The state of the Republican party, I think is due to the widespread availability of so-called news outlets - which allow one to watch broadcasts that reinforce ones viewpoint regardless of fact. It's a Goddamn mess. Even if Trump loses in 2024, it's not over. Come 2028 some new Trump will emerge and we'll be right back at the present - where Democracy is on the line.

And I don't buy for a second all the demographics ideas about young voters replacing older voters and immigrants being more likely to vote Democrat and thus demographics doom Republicans. I've heard precisely this in 1978 from my social studies teacher. Too many factors are at play to confidently predict that the far Right viewpoint in America is dying.
 
Last edited:
BlueMoonAcrossThePond said:
Can Democracy in America survive given the status quo in free speech - where one is free to lie about most things - lawsuits seem to be the only curb - free of consequence? In which, basically 1/2 of Americans are tuned into a false narrative?
Click to expand...
I think something very bad are happening in the US, because I do know that the "uyghur genocide" is a lie, "social credit" is a lie too, and "religious oppression" "minority ethnic oppression", they are all lies. And that means, I think nearly 4/5 of American population can be tuned into a false narrative. The democracy in America is in a very dangerous situation.
 
Alvin-blue-qhd said:
I think something very bad are happening in the US, because I do know that the "uyghur genocide" is a lie, "social credit" is a lie too, and "religious oppression" "minority ethnic oppression", they are all lies. And that means, I think nearly 4/5 of American population can be tuned into a false narrative. The democracy in America is in a very dangerous situation.
Click to expand...
1716985758364.png

If you are in fact serious then:
1) Uyghur genocide is true;
2) I don't know what you mean by "social credit," "religious oppression," and "minority ethnic oppression" and cannot comment on this without clarification about what you mean.
 
bluethrunthru said:
she wanted to be POTUS

Click to expand...

This post seems to be more than a bit misleading - as if Biden supports genocide of Palestinians.

Israel is a longstanding ally of the US and the Hamas attack on Israel was rightly met with condemnation and subsequent arms support. What's transpired since is that Netanyahu has engaged in an indiscriminate attack on Palestinians. This clearly isn't going to win anything other than perhaps support for Netanyahu among hard line Israelis.

Biden is caught in a fucking political mess. He's tried to push back on Netanyahu but that's risky - politically in the US and in terms of long term diplomatic relations with Isreal.

It's a fucking mess.

Biden is, IMO, doing about the best he can.
===
Edit:
And Haley is a fucking opportunist. Just how far her morals - such as they are - can be stretched in support of her career remains to be seen. At the very least, Haley is willing to endorse Trump as President - she stated that she'll vote for Trump. This in spite of her close contact and knowledge of Trump due to her role as UN Ambassador under his rule.
 
Last edited:
BlueMoonAcrossThePond said:
View attachment 120644

If you are in fact serious then:
1) Uyghur genocide is true;
2) I don't know what you mean by "social credit," "religious oppression," and "minority ethnic oppression" and cannot comment on this without clarification about what you mean.
Click to expand...
Uyghurs are everywhere, uyghur genocide totally a lie.
Uyghur football players in Chinese football national team, in City Football Group's ShenZhen new peng city team , in Sun jihai's young academy team.
Don't believe those BS about Uyghur genocide.
 
Alvin-blue-qhd said:
Uyghurs are everywhere, uyghur genocide totally a lie.
Uyghur football players in Chinese football national team, in City Football Group's ShenZhen new peng city team , in Sun jihai's young academy team.
Don't believe those BS about Uyghur genocide.
Click to expand...
And yet the bulk of - perhaps all of - reputable reporting from numerous outlets supports the fact that the Chinese are engaged in an all-out attempt to eliminate Uyghurs.

There's two possibilities here:

1) You are correct. BBC, NBC, ABC, CBS, US PBS, and so and and so on, are all, for whatever reason wrong about this.

2) You are wrong.

I'm going with possibility 2.
 
Alvin-blue-qhd said:
I think something very bad are happening in the US, because I do know that the "uyghur genocide" is a lie, "social credit" is a lie too, and "religious oppression" "minority ethnic oppression", they are all lies. And that means, I think nearly 4/5 of American population can be tuned into a false narrative. The democracy in America is in a very dangerous situation.
Click to expand...
This post illustrates just how fucked up so-called free speech is.

We are now free to pick and choose our realities by listening to and believing broadcasts that echo our beliefs.

Worse still is upcoming... what happens when AI and Internet hacking combine to worst effect?

Credible-seeming posts from trusted outlets can easily be faked - probably now - but certainly in the next few years. Actors hostile to the US/UK/Democracy will certainly exploit this.

And then... what?... How does one know what is true and what is false? Virtually unregulated free speech is fucking bullshit.

IMO, there needs to be a huge change in free speech laws to align with modernity.

There needs to be an authority in charge of flagging political speech as truthful or not. And there needs to be a trusted stamp of approval - backed by cryptography that's (virtually) impossible to crack - even in the advent that quantum computing becomes practical (it eventually will) - such stamp from a trusted authority authenticating a post as real.

Otherwise, no one knows what's true or false, and there's zero chance that decisions can rationally be made.
 
Last edited:
BlueMoonAcrossThePond said:
This post seems to be more than a bit misleading - as if Biden supports genocide of Palestinians.

Israel is a longstanding ally of the US and the Hamas attack on Israel was rightly met with condemnation and subsequent arms support. What's transpired since is that Netanyahu has engaged in an indiscriminate attack on Palestinians. This clearly isn't going to win anything other than perhaps support for Netanyahu among hard line Israelis.

Biden is caught in a fucking political mess. He's tried to push back on Netanyahu but that's risky - politically in the US and in terms of long term diplomatic relations with Isreal.

It's a fucking mess.

Biden is, IMO, doing about the best he can.
Click to expand...

somebody needs to tell Joe how many Muslim voters there are in the USA - especially the ones in swing states
 
BlueMoonAcrossThePond said:
This post illustrates just how fucked up so-called free speech is.

We are now free to pick and chose our realities by listening to and believing broadcasts that echo our beliefs.

Worse still is upcoming... what happens when AI and Internet hacking combine to worst effect?

Credible-seeming posts from trusted outlets can easily be faked - probably now - but certainly in the next few years. Actors hostile to the US/UK/Democracy will certainly exploit this.

And then... what?

IMO, there needs to be a huge change in free speech laws to align with modernity.

There needs to be an authority in charge of flagging political speech as truthful or not. And there needs to be a trusted stamp of approval - backed by cryptography that's (virtually) impossible to crack - even in the advent that quantum computing becomes practical (it eventually will).

Otherwise, no one knows what's true or false, and there's zero chance that decisions can rationally be made.
Click to expand...
I feel sad.
I live in this country all my life. I don't live in Xinjiang, but it's not some mysterious place. Many people have some family members, classmates, friends, who live in Xinjiang. It's a place if i buy a ticket now, I can be there tomorrow.
It's a lie. Everybody , we are the people here living on the ground, we know it.
Those media, they lie to you .
feeling depressed
 
Alvin-blue-qhd said:
I feel sad.
I live in this country all my life. I don't live in Xinjiang, but it's not some mysterious place. Many people have some family members, classmates, friends, who live in Xinjiang. It's a place if i buy a ticket now, I can be there tomorrow.
It's a lie. Everybody , we are the people here living on the ground, we know it.
Those media, they lie to you .
feeling depressed
Click to expand...
And there you go... yet another someone in the echo chamber of mistruth who will never, ever be convinced that he's listening to lies.
 
BlueMoonAcrossThePond said:
And there you go... yet another someone in the echo chamber of mistruth who will never, ever be convinced that he's listening to lies.
Click to expand...


If the Clinton fiasco and the Brexit fuck up hasn't taught you anything yet then there is no hope. The world is an echo chamber and depending on who you're listening to you're getting completely different information.
 
mexico1970 said:
But who do you believe? There is no final arbiter at all in the political space or the media.
Click to expand...
Reread my previous posts.

I'm arguing that there needs to be an arbiter, otherwise there's no knowing what's true versus what's false. And it's going to get exponentially less clear in a few years once AI kicks in.

There needs to be a massive, massive change in what constitutes free speech - otherwise what is true is completely unknown.

I think that free speech can largely be maintained - except that there needs to be:
1) Cryptographically unbreakable stamps showing who is claiming what;
2) An arbiter of truth, cryptographically stamping posts as unverified/untrue/misleading or verified.

I think that 1 and 2 above are possible; and moreover, are necessary.
 
BlueMoonAcrossThePond said:
Reread my previous posts.

I'm arguing that there needs to be an arbiter, otherwise there's no knowing what's true versus what's false. And it's going to get exponentially less clear in a few years once AI kicks in.

There needs to be a massive, massive change in what constitutes free speech - otherwise what is true is completely unknown.
Click to expand...


There isn't an arbiter because there isn't anyone fit enough to be one and with the amount of lies and misinformation out there you'd need an army of them.

This is the truth it's happening now and unless you live in a dictatorship where your democratic rights are infringed it will always happen when you get to vote or decide through information given to you in bad faith.

Sleepy Joe Biden
Cheeto boy
Cackling Kamala

Rishi Sunak
Sir Keir Starmer

All ridiculed, nobody respects politicians mainly because they are liars, I console myself with the knowledge that unless we live in an outright autocracy where we have no fake democracy to cling onto then I will just lean back watch the mental gymnastics of people explaining why their side is the best.
 
mexico1970 said:
There isn't an arbiter because there isn't anyone fit enough to be one and with the amount of lies and misinformation out there you'd need an army of them.

This is the truth it's happening now and unless you live in a dictatorship where your democratic right are infringed it will always happen when you get to vote or decide through information given to you in bad faith.

Sleepy Joe Biden
Cheeto boy
Cackling Kamala

Rishi Sunak
Sir Keir Starmer

All ridiculed, nobody respects politicians mainly because they are liars, I console myself with the knowledge that unless we live in an outright autocracy where we have no fake democracy to cling onto then I will just lean back watch the mental gymnastics of people explaining why their side is the best.
Click to expand...
Completely disagree.

At some level, there's trust. Perhaps a bit flawed, but still so.

In the US - as a for example - it's a jury of trial among 12 peers. In the UK and elsewhere other examples no doubt exist. Trust may be misplaced or wrong at times - yet still, it's more often than not accurate.

If there's no trust in anyone or any institution whatsoever to authenticate a post or comment as truthful or based in truth - then society is totally fucked. I don't think that this is the case.
===
Let's carry this to the extreme.

There's no trust.

And then an election for President occurs.

A wins over B by a landslide. B claims that the election is fake.

There is zero trust. Who knows WTF happened? Chaos. Riots. Possible civil war.

If trust cannot be established this is the inevitable result. If trust can be established - I think it can - then my thinking that free speech must be regulated at least in part by a trust mechanism is inescapable.
 
Last edited:
BlueMoonAcrossThePond said:
Completely disagree.

At some level, there's trust. Perhaps a bit flawed, but still so.

In the US, it's a jury of trial among 12 peers - just as an example. In the UK and elsewhere other examples no doubt exist.

If there's no trust in anyone or any institution whatsoever to authenticate a post or comment as truthful or based in truth - then society is totally fucked. I don't think that this is the case.
Click to expand...

Where are your army of arbiters bringing fake news to book? It isn't going to happen, it just isn't feasible.

From time to time I watch the senate meetings to decide nominees etc for lifetime appointments and the amount of skulduggery on display is astounding, it's pure theatre it's an abomination how the candidates weasel their way out of questions posed to them (This isn't just a US problem it's democracies in general).

Accept we don't really live in a utopian democracy and never will but take the small wins or we will end up living in an autocracy where decisions are rights are removed and decisions made for us.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top