US Politics Thread

[Damocles]

I've yet to see a single recent message authored by Domalino Damocles on this thread which is about defending his position logically, offering facts, examples and reason. Instead it's just content free attack post after attack post.

Since he's unwilling to engage in conversation I've put him on ignore.

Because I don't respect 90% of the output. Let's be clear, you lot entirely invented my whole positions, never bothering to ask for accuracy, then called me every name under the Sun from Nazi to MAGA extremist including tagging me in shit and randomly slagging me off. I have no time for you outside popping in with the odd sarcastic comment. I'm not engaging with you because I don't believe you're with engaging with, frankly.

Example, @SebastianBlue. I read the other day where you said you were keeping out of arguments out of respect but you disagree with some of my politics. Great. Which ones? Which ones specifically? Because you've literally never bothered to speak to me about politics and instead have read out of context reimaginings of years old posts by people I've disliked for years. You've invented a boogeyman then cried foul when I told people to fuck off with it then have the gall to talk about "my politics". You don't know my politics because you never bothered to ask. And you want to to talk about engagement.

I'm always open for an actual debate with normal people, which i do elsewhere, but this place ain't it. You've started with conclusions, you use stupid reasoning as with the "Trump is a Nazi because some video said Reich in it" which doesn't even make the smallest bit of sense, and you whip each other into a frenzy. It's funny isn't it how this entire subforum generally tends to believe the exact same stuff? There's no active Trump supporters here. There's few active Tories here. There's even very few people here now who voted to leave a trading union. And that never seems to strike you as odd, mainly because your positions are so incredibly self evident to you that disagreement must be intellectual or moral inferiority. Thats essentially a cult.

This forum has had a bullying problem for the best part of 15 years. I've been the bully side too in years back. Little gangs of extremely active users form and give snide little digs and sarcasm and completely fail to engage outside of trying to "gotcha" the "other side". Especially if those people arent as eloquent or verbose. The Code of Conduct and moderation never stopped it, because we couldn't really define the terms. This place isn't new, it's just the same old thing that I've seen for almost two decades and I'm bored of and frankly you're a bunch of 40 and 50 year olds who need to find other things to do. I won't engage with people who are trying to "win" an argument rather than discuss an issue because I grew bored of that shit many years ago and have no desire to restart now.

 

[Damocles]

You have implied something (that apparently no one can infer meaning and intent of the words and actions of anyone they do not know personally)

No i didnt.

which makes no sense when it is logically applied to any person, public figure or otherwise, completely independent of the topic of the thread. And when pressed on that point, rather than engaging in debate, you merely call me a zealot and state my baseline is broken, without actually clarifying your position or refuting my cogent rebuke of it.

there wasnt a cogent rebuke

By the way, I did not compare Trump and Putin

yes you did, you grouped them together with "people like"

—I merely asked if because we do not know either personally, we have to give both the benefit of the doubt, ignoring the evidence of our eyes and ears when it comes to their speech, policy, and actions, as you have implied. I used them as prominent examples, particularly given their relevance to the topic of this thread. You have read something that was not written—I would hope accidentally, rather than maliciously.

For a man who has had to say "well you implied" rather than "well you said" numerous times, maybe you should reflect on this.

I think you may need to reassess your own baseline at this point, as many of your statements have become irrational and belligerent, completely separate from the topic of the thread.

You have no idea what my baseline is apart from "you are irrational people not worth engaging with".

 

[SebastianBlue]

Example, @SebastianBlue. I read the other day where you said you were keeping out of arguments out of respect but you disagree with some of my politics. Great. Which ones? Which ones specifically? Because you've literally never bothered to speak to me about politics and instead have read out of context reimaginings of years old posts by people I've disliked for years. You've invented a boogeyman then cried foul when I told people to fuck off with it then have the gall to talk about "my politics". You don't know my politics because you never bothered to ask. And you want to to talk about engagement.

I didn’t cry foul over your politics, I suggested that the overall discussion had become inappropriate per the Code of Conduct and it needed to be cleaned up and reset, which Ric did. Yours were not the only posts removed. I mentioned my overall position on the debate, but my respect for the participants, as a way of providing context to my suggestion. You are assigning specific focus on you when that was not the case.

We have discussed politics over the years. You may not remember, but we have. And I haven’t made you in to a bogeyman—when have I said anything that would imply that?

I have been nothing but respectful and have engaged directly with what you have said, giving you opportunity to clarify and refute, whilst you continually attack me personally for doing so. You have made me in to a bogeyman, it seems.

Which is ironic, given your pontification about bullying and the Code of Conduct.

 

[SebastianBlue]

No i didnt.


there wasnt a cogent rebuke

yes you did, you grouped them together with "people like"

For a man who has had to say "well you implied" rather than "well you said" numerous times, maybe you should reflect on this.

You have no idea what my baseline is apart from "you are irrational people not worth engaging with".

You’ve still not actually responded to my initial reply, so I assume you have no intention of doing so. And based on your other posts, I think there is no reason to continue our exchange, given it will just continue the same pattern of me trying to engage earnestly and you attacking me personally for some reason.

I am sorry it has come to this. I really do wish you well.

 

[BlueMoonAcrossThePond]

I know that many (most?) of you discount polls as predictors of election outcomes, and I've heard your various arguments against trusting polls.

Nonetheless, this is fucking scary (odds of winning the presidency according to bettors - Trump 53%; Biden, 39%).

Election Betting Odds

Live betting odds on the 2024 presidential election, and more! Who will win? Biden, Trump, Harris, DeSantis?...

electionbettingodds.com

At the same time, going state-by-state, should odds hold precisely, the same website shows that Biden would narrowly win reelection - but this supposes that Biden wins a bunch of swing states that are extremely close - the odds that he'll carry all such swing states is low, supposing that the odds cited are accurate (they likely are not exactly accurate and yes I'm aware of the numerous objections as to the accuracy of election outcome polling).

We're months away from election day, and Biden is facing blowback from the Israeli-Palestinian crisis that will likely (hopefully) resolve prior to election day. At the same time, Jesus fucking Christ - how is it possible that so many Americans support Trump?...

To answer my own question - I think that a huge part of the support for Trump is due to the echo chamber of lies and misinformation propagated by numerous right-leaning outlets which gladly serve up mistruths because that is what their audience wants to hear and moreover, aligns with the viewpoints of their ownership.

 

[Alvin-blue-qhd]

At the same time, Jesus fucking Christ - how is it possible that so many Americans support Trump?...

woke culture, illegal immigrates, deep state?

 

[BlueMoonAcrossThePond]

woke culture, illegal immigrates, deep state?

I've answered this above - "I think that a huge part of the support for Trump is due to the echo chamber of lies and misinformation propagated by numerous right-leaning outlets."
===
To elaborate on the points you've raised:

Woke Culture - sure, some fringe leftist beliefs go way too far. Renaming a "George Washington High School" because George Washington owned slaves is ridiculous, IMO, and wouldn't be supported by most Democrats. At the same time, thinking that non-binary sexual orientation is some sort of mental illness or moral sin is wrong and yet I'm guessing that you'd likely label this belief as "woke." At this point the Right uses the term "woke" as a buzzword, umbrella term designed to trigger outrage among their constituents without assigning it any particular meaning at all.

Illegal Immigrants - Democrats caved to many Republican demands and in partnership with Republicans crafted a sweeping bipartisan immigration bill. Which would have passed, except that Trump didn't want the bill to pass under Biden's term in office as that would deprive him of a political talking point. You can safely blame the immigration mess on Trump at this point.

Deep State - the entire concept is conspiracy theory at its finest. The bureaucracy functions to enforce laws. If you don't like the current laws, vote in representatives that endorse your viewpoint and change the laws. But don't engage in some sort of conspiracy theory that the laws are fine but that a corrupt, deep seated, pervasive conspiracy exists to thwart your viewpoint.

 

[SkyBlueFlux]

woke culture, illegal immigrates, deep state?

I don’t disagree with your comment but I think that just goes to show that the Republican’s entire platform is based on inventing boogeymen to be afraid of. That’s basically what all three of those are. Sure they all have some origins in fact or a grain of truth, there are progressives who focus too much on identity politics, there are undocumented people in the US, there are career politicians, lobbyists and corruption hindering effective governance that you might interpret as a “deep state”.

But rather than combatting the factual reality associated with these things and proposing policy to put forward their own view of how they would make things better, they instead just build them all into some homogeneous group of absurd and unrealistic caricatures. They don’t need policies, they just need to create scary enough enemies to get you to vote for them.

I was listening to Rory Stewart on a podcast the other day and I think he said something quite pertinent, which is that people have a tendency these days on all sides of the political spectrum to paint literally everything as an existential threat to society. Immigrants, LGBTQ people, Muslims, corruption, Putin… whatever it may be… everything is painted as do or die, and of course this isn’t true. It’s just exhausting. Not everything has to be an existential threat to society, the truth is some things are just “sub-optimal”.

The right wing in particular seem to be obsessed with the idea that literally everything is trying to kill them or destroy their way of life. Like… maybe gay people won’t lead to the downfall of Judeo-Christian civilisation… maybe we’ll just have like… slightly fewer kids and more cocktail bars or something… y’know.

 

[Postman Pep]

 

[Alvin-blue-qhd]

But rather than combatting the factual reality associated with these things and proposing policy to put forward their own view of how they would make things better, they instead just build them all into some homogeneous group of absurd and unrealistic caricatures. They don’t need policies, they just need to create scary enough enemies to get you to vote for them.

It's a common phenomenon，isn't it？

For example, if there is a street with some security problems, robbery, theft and violence, you need to put some cameras on the street. It's so simple, you got a problem, you address the problem, you do what you need to do.

But nowadays, there is another narrative about it. Your privacy, human right, freedom of whatever, blah blah. I think people have gone too far about it. Not only the right-leaning, but also the left.