Jump to content
downzy

US Politics/Elections Thread

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, soon said:

This threads residents socons might be interested in the Conservative Party Canada leadership race. @Silent Jay @Basic_GnR_Fan

They just lost an election to a black face clown in part because their rather moderate leader at the time couldnt look in a camera and affirm that he was fine with gays (also he's boing af). So thats the tone of the electorate here. But the socons arent having it, as you can imagine. And meanwhile their dark over lord Stephen Harper has forced the most progressive voices out of the leadership race. Clearly looking for that sweet spot.

Throw into the mix that fiscons are in a quandary with more of those types acknowledging that there is a climate crisis that needs address (some of whom voted for the Liberal Prime Minstrel initially but have been disillusioned since). But the climate crisis costs money, so they are basically sidelined.

meow meow meow, What Im trying to say is its kinda interesting and is also peripherally related to the Trump Effect.

I would ask this, was it the not being pro gay stance that cost them, or their economic policies? Usually socially conservative politicians in the west package that with unpopular neoliberal economic policies (because their big donors demand it). I'd imagine the Canadian conservatives are no different in that regard than the GOP establishment in America.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

I would ask this, was it the not being pro gay stance that cost them, or their economic policies? Usually socially conservative politicians in the west package that with unpopular neoliberal economic policies (because their big donors demand it). I'd imagine the Canadian conservatives are no different in that regard than the GOP establishment in America.

His tense inability to assure the voter that he wont attack gay rights (along with a similar inability to assure the voter that they wont reopen the abortion debate) basically masked any of their messaging on other policy. CPCs financial policy is literally "stop debt." But everyone still wants their healthcare so its imho a fun little theme for them to balance. Additionally, Conservatives have run the greatest deficits in recent history.

Id also mention that they have set this really high donations threshold to enter the leadership race, so that guarantees that only elites can run. Not the type of thing that Im hearing socons cheer on these days...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, soon said:

His tense inability to assure the voter that he wont attack gay rights (along with a similar inability to assure the voter that they wont reopen the abortion debate) basically masked any of their messaging on other policy. CPCs financial policy is literally "stop debt." But everyone still wants their healthcare so its imho a fun little theme for them to balance. Additionally, Conservatives have run the greatest deficits in recent history.

Id also mention that they have set this really high donations threshold to enter the leadership race, so that guarantees that only elites can run. Not the type of thing that Im hearing socons cheer on these days...

The kicker is usually it's stop debt for the little guy (cut social benefits) but big debt for corporate tax cuts and beefed up military budgets. Which is the other area that conservatives shoot themselves in the foot, people claim to love the military but they've grown weary of the interventionist foreign policy that these beefed up military budgets are really for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

The kicker is usually it's stop debt for the little guy (cut social benefits) but big debt for corporate tax cuts and beefed up military budgets. Which is the other area that conservatives shoot themselves in the foot, people claim to love the military but they've grown weary of the interventionist foreign policy that these beefed up military budgets are really for.

First, I realize I forgot to directly answer your earlier question: Yes the party is on board with neoliberalism. It was a Conservative who negotiated (in secret) and implemented NAFTA. As far as I can tell its not something that many of them take issue with. Like they will rail against loosing jobs to other countries, but Ive never heard them address the core elements of neoliberalism. And they are pro fossil fuel and anti union.

In the previous leadership race the runner-up quit the party after his loss and started the Peoples Party which would in-theory be home to those critical of neoliberalism (but as it was with the new party, they were all too bonkers to even know what neoliberalism is). He lost his seat and no PP candidate won election.

The last time Conservatives formed govt it was a squarely neocon brand of neoliberalism guiding the ship. And just like you called it here, they cut corporate taxes and jacked up military spending like mad. That leader, Stephen Harper, is still their dark over lord but the party really got an ass whopping over his tenure as PM. Thats how we got the Prime Minstrel. Trudeaus slogan was actually "sunny ways" because shit got that dark with Harper and his brazen islamophbia. He ran the largest deficit in recent times.

Harper has in recent days chased out the most progressive candidates from the leadership race despite the fact that they lost the recent election due to a lack of voter uptake on socon values. I guess thats where it gets interesting to me. The whole appeasing everyone and pleasing no one thing. That paired with the fact that fiscons cant address the climate crisis because it costs so much money to address, kinda leaves the party in a tough spot - neither traditional base will address climate change. Theres tons of potential conservative voters who accept the science, though.

The party can appease its socon base and loose an election. Or it can loose its socon base to potentially win an election (can they though?). Thats my arm chair observation at least, lol.

This lady is among the early front-runner currently, for CPC leadership. In the first 25 seconds you can hear her suggest that allowing parents to grow up to 4 plants of weed means that "little Jonny can go get some and smoke it in the toaster oven" :lol: She also once read a poem she wrote in opposition to legal weed! Thats how out of touch the socons are here. But theres many of them.

 

Edited by soon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, soon said:

First, I realize I forgot to directly answer your earlier question: Yes the party is on board with neoliberalism. It was a Conservative who negotiated (in secret) and implemented NAFTA. As far as I can tell its not something that many of them take issue with. Like they will rail against loosing jobs to other countries, but Ive never heard them address the core elements of neoliberalism. And they are pro fossil fuel and anti union.

In the previous leadership race the runner-up quit the party after his loss and started the Peoples Party which would in-theory be home to those critical of neoliberalism (but as it was with the new party, they were all too bonkers to even know what neoliberalism is). He lost his seat and no PP candidate won election.

The last time Conservatives formed govt it was a squarely neocon brand of neoliberalism guiding the ship. And just like you called it here, they cut corporate taxes and jacked up military spending like mad. That leader, Stephen Harper, is still their dark over lord but the party really got an ass whopping over his tenure as PM. Thats how we got the Prime Minstrel. Trudeaus slogan was actually "sunny ways" because shit got that dark with Harper and his brazen islamophbia. He ran the largest deficit in recent times.

Harper has in recent days chased out the most progressive candidates from the leadership race despite the fact that they lost the recent election due to a lack of voter uptake on socon values. I guess thats where it gets interesting to me. The whole appeasing everyone and pleasing no one thing. That paired with the fact that fiscons cant address the climate crisis because it costs so much money to address, kinda leaves the party in a tough spot - neither traditional base will address climate change. Theres tons of potential conservative voters who accept the science, though.

The party can appease its socon base and loose an election. Or it can loose its socon base to potentially win an election (can they though?). Thats my arm chair observation at least, lol.

This lady is among the early front-runner currently, for CPC leadership. In the first 25 seconds you can hear her suggest that allowing parents to grow up to 4 plants of weed means that "little Jonny can go get some and smoke it in the toaster oven" :lol: She also once read a poem she wrote in opposition to legal weed! Thats how out of touch the socons are here. But theres many of them.

 

Ha, that all sounds just like our Republicans. I place the blame where it belongs, with the big time donors and the media which spits out these talking points/policies, and I'm sure those on the left would have the same critique's of the mainstream of their parties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

Ha, that all sounds just like our Republicans. I place the blame where it belongs, with the big time donors and the media which spits out these talking points/policies, and I'm sure those on the left would have the same critique's of the mainstream of their parties.

Yeah, I can see what you mean. In my lifetime there hasn’t been multiple conservative parties. It looks possible that the Cpc is facing the threat of splintering currently - and here we could have a second viable, major right leaning party.

imho we don’t have a viable left party here. We have the new Democrat’s who ostensibly fill that roll though. And I suppose I do have similar criticisms. Although socons did just loose for being socons, whereas I don’t know that New Democrats - who also just lost - going further left would hurt then at all. Their progressive leader started the last election campaign as an embarrassing child, but came out the other end a statesman. :headbang:

anyways I didn’t mean to derail US politics thread!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What are peoples thoughts about Toe Rogans 'endorsement' of Bernie?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, soon said:

What are peoples thoughts about Toe Rogans 'endorsement' of Bernie?

I think he’s a metatarshole. :lol: 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Dazey said:

I think he’s a metatarshole. :lol: 

NX9fc10.gif

Lol'ing :lol::lol:

Fucking class man! 

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... Okay Ill share my thoughts on Rogans endorsement then :)

Never chase away anyone who is willing to embrace a progressive message.

In NA thats the way that leftism exists in todays world - people come to us. They didnt used to be lefties and maybe thought some shitty things... maybe they DID some shitty things, but they are home now.

Rogan will always be the guy who is "friends" with Alex Jones, who made that horribly racist Planet of the Apes comment, and the guy who has mindlessly mainstreamed alt right and bigoted ideologues. The key there is that his reach has the ability to mainstream ideas and people. There is absolutely no reason to not jump on that production line and mainstream Bernie to Rogans largely unaffiliated audience. (if the audience in general had strong affiliations he couldnt maintain all of their attention as he hosts guests from all over the spectrum - the spectrums of both politics and sanity that is :lol:).

I forget who said of Turmp "His followers might not all be racists, but they sure dont mind if Trump is." And to win this thing we need all people of good will, not just all people of Columbia University Poli-sci :lol: So I would frame it this way,

Not all people who will vote for Bernie are Progressives, but they sure dont mind if Bernie is. :headbang::headbang::headbang:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, soon said:

Rogan will always be the guy who is "friends" with Alex Jones, who made that horribly racist Planet of the Apes comment, and the guy who has mindlessly mainstreamed alt right and bigoted ideologues. 

:facepalm:

When you say things like this it makes you look very uninformed and close minded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Silent Jay said:

:facepalm:

When you say things like this it makes you look very uninformed and close minded.

And yet you didnt even try to explain why... :lol:

So I think Im good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, soon said:

And yet you didnt even try to explain why... :lol:

So I think Im good.

Because any endorsement like this is a real problem for the democrats and the mainstream media, they don't want Bernie.

They're mad because Joe Rogan is massively popular, more people listen to his podcast than all CNN hosts combined together.

The narrative that Joe Rogan is an alt-right nazi is out of touch and the outrage is fake.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Silent Jay said:

Because any endorsement like this is a real problem for the democrats and the mainstream media, they don't want Bernie.

They're mad because Joe Rogan is massively popular, more people listen to his podcast than all CNN hosts combined together.

The narrative that Joe Rogan is an alt-right nazi is out of touch and the outrage is fake.

 

You've misread my post. :) 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, soon said:

You've misread my post. :) 

Yet you fall into the false narrative that Rogan is an alt-right figure propagating as a smear against your candidate.

Edited by Silent Jay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Silent Jay said:

Yet you fall into the false narrative that Rogan is an alt-right figure propagating as a smear against your candidate.

No. Thats not at all what I said.

I didn't call him an "alt-right figure."  Again, you should re-read my post.

I also embraced his endorsement. :shrugs:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whats key is that Bernie isn't tailoring his platform to pander to those elements (homophobic, racist, etc) to get those votes.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont tend to think that Rogans audience are bigots. Like I say, they are typically politically unaffiliated (broadly speaking). Its Rogans past comments and some of his guests, like Molyeneux, that create what some see as a problematic scenario for an endorsement. Again, as I stated in my initial post, I reject that premise and celebrate the endorsement. I doubt that Rogans endorsement will change any of his bigot guests minds. But it will inform the opinions of his centrist and apolitical audience.

So I dont think the main issue that some have is the potential that bigots vote Bernie (which many will), but its more of an optics thing.

To me the optics are great! 'Online Leader of Dudes Endorses Sanders' looks good from where Im sitting. 

The reason that me and many others are trying to give the complainers a swift kick in the pants is because this type of bs has already caused Bernie to reject Cenks endorsement!! Fucking bonkers! Cenk co-founded the Justice Democrats. The Justice Democrats are the people who brought the world - and certainly the Sanders campaign - AOC! And that was over issues that Cenk had clearly evolved on. :facepalm:

Here in Canada the "in it's purest form or death" types join the Marxist Leninist Party. And they get even less votes than the Canadian Communist Party (who are cool!) :lol:. Its not a winning strategy. 

 

TL;DR - Fuck virtue signalling!! Lets win this thing!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A father in Indiana was carrying a loaded gun while wrestling with his 4 year old son indoors. And if you live outside the US you'll easily guess what happened next. Oh yeah. But Dad is expected to survive his injuries. So theres a Go Fund Me to cover his medical expenses :facepalm: This is America.

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/olivianiland/4-year-old-shot-head-indiana-play-wrestling-with-dad

Edited by soon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When i was maybe 5 i found my dads .38 under his dresser.

I only remember little pieces but my dad said that it was one of the scariest moments walking in the living room and seeing me sitting there with it in my lap.

Luckily i seemed to understand the danger of it and there was no accident.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump and Netanyahu are both facing serious issues at home and have decided nows the time to attack the Palestinians...

Trump will announce his 'deal of the century' about Israel and Palestine at noon est. And good people will resist it.

************

Trump set to unveil long-awaited Middle East peace plan

Netanyahu has called for annexing parts of the West Bank 

"....A key element will be whether the proposal includes an American approval to any Israeli annexation of the West Bank.

In the run-up to Israel's March 2 election, Netanyahu has called for annexing parts of the West Bank and imposing Israeli sovereignty on all its settlements there. Israel captured the West Bank in the 1967 Mideast war, and the Jordan Valley in particular is considered a vital security asset.

The Palestinians seek the West Bank and east Jerusalem as parts of an independent Palestinian state.

The international community considers both territories to be occupied and all settlements illegal. But the Trump administration, in a break from its predecessors and the rest of the world, has taken a much friendlier approach and in November declared it does not consider settlements illegal.

After a slowdown in settlement activity during the final years of the anti-settlement Obama administration, Israel has stepped up its plans for construction since Trump took office.

Both settlers and their critics call this the "Trump effect," and predict a jump in construction in the coming years.

According to the anti-settlement watchdog group Peace Now, Israel in 2019 pushed forward plans to build 9,413 settlement homes, roughly the same levels as 2017 and 2018. The figures are more than triple the level of settlement planning during the final two years of the Obama administration...."

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/dc-white-house-mideast-plan-1.5442749

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump has finally brought peace to the "Al-Aqua" mosque :facepalm:

May all who posses scuba gear visit it in peace. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Silent Jay said:

 

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/22/2020 at 6:26 PM, soon said:

How about the US economic warfare against Venezuela? The Lima group? Hello??

I mean, do I have to frame the argument on behalf of both of you?! :P:lol:

 

 

What economic warfare against Venezuela?  

The Venezula economy has contracted by over a third since 2013.  

3 million people have fled Venezuela since 2015.

But all of this is America's fault?  

You reference the Lima group (something America isn't even officially apart of) as though that's suppose to mean anything. 

Venezuela's economic and humanitarian misery started long before both the Lima group and the Trump administration.

Venezuela's economy has been largely dependent on one commodity: oil.  They have done nothing to diversify or broaden the economy.  When oil prices crashed in 2014, so too did the Venezuelan economy.  It's leaders did nothing to save for a rainy day.  There was a complete lack of investment in  state owned oil production, leading to a dramatic drop in yields between 2008 and 2018.

The sanctions leveled at Venezuela in 2014 were only after the Maduro government instituted a violent crackdown on those who protested mass inflation and shortages.  The sanctions were limited and targeted to the individuals accused of human rights violations; they were not broad-based sanctions affecting Venezuelan people.  

The Trump administration has ratcheted up sanctions since 2017 by restricting trade in Venezuelan bonds and the state owned oil and gas company, PVDSA.

But again, these actions came long after the economic ruin that the Maduro and Chavez governments are responsible for. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×