The US Politics/Elections Thread 2.0

[dontdamnmeuyi2015]

10 hours ago, Oldest Goat said:

Except it's not a hot air balloon it's a spy balloon and it's in US air space directly over the nuclear missile silos.

Are you referring to the US navy positioning itself strategically in response to China threatening to invade Taiwan? Have they entered Chinese waters or airspace?

One is over Latin America now. Let's see what they do?  I can understand not blowing it up over America, but something really needs to be done.  China is doing whatever the hell they want to as Russia is and the US just sits and talks and talks. What a mess!

If China or any other country had a balloon over Israel I give them 5 minutes before they blew it up. Gotta love Israel.

[dontdamnmeuyi2015]

American just shot down the Chinese spy plane off the coast of the Carolinas. Let's see what China says and if there was anyway to actually see what it was?

[dontdamnmeuyi2015]

I'm curious to see if/when we will find out what was or anything was in that balloon.

SNL did a skit with the talking balloon and it was damn funny.

[downzy]

On 2/3/2023 at 8:43 PM, Axls_Moustache_Rules said:

Yeahh democrats never ever discuss Identity politics lol.

That wasn't my point.  Every tribe is guilty of it.

But besides culture wars, identity politics, and cancel culture, what does the current Republican party stand for?  What are their proposals to deal with climate change, growing wealth inequality, health care, education, immigration reform, etc?  You may not like or disagree with the Democrats on how they plan on addressing these issues and challenges, but at least the Democrats have actual policy proposals.  As far as I can see, Republicans have little to nothing to offer in terms of tangible policy prescriptions that address the most pressing matters.  

[Axls_Moustache_Rules]

Republicans Vs Democrats - American theatre. Identity politics is here to stay.

I don't really care but I do find it amusing.

[downzy]

10 hours ago, Axls_Moustache_Rules said:

Republicans Vs Democrats - American theatre. Identity politics is here to stay.

I don't really care but I do find it amusing.

Identity politics has been around since the country's inception.  Do you honestly think there's anything new about tribalism in today's political climate?

 

[downzy]

2 hours ago, Oldest Goat said:

Yeah. Tribalism may have always existed as a fringe/extreme but these days it is rampant and seems to have been normalized. Hopefully people are becoming burnt-out though and decide to start thinking.

Are you not familiar with the 3/5ths compromise drawn up by the founders?

Tribalism has defined American politics from the get go.  Read any book during any tumultuous period of American history and you're going to read a story of pervasive tribal politics.  I just finished Doris Kearns Goodwin's book Team of Rivals on Abraham Lincoln and his cabinet.  If you think tribalism is bad now you should really pick up this book.  It's been way worse through American history.  

2 hours ago, Oldest Goat said:

Democrats; better than the republicans(extremely low bar) but they wear their "not as fucked up as the republicans" badge with far too much smug self-satisfaction.

So they shouldn't be satisfied that they're the only functional political party that offers genuine policy proposals for actual problems?  

2 hours ago, Oldest Goat said:

Force feeds hyper-awkward, sanctimonious, holier than thou, virtue signalling nonsense all just to fuel their egos and they're so obsessed with all that, they weaken the side and ostracize fellow democrats at whim.

Examples?

2 hours ago, Oldest Goat said:

And neither party even attempts to address the systemic issues such as the lobbyists or the military industrial complex.

True, but there are far more Democrats than Republicans who want to cut down on access to lobbyists and bring down the military's budget.  Outside of maybe Rand Paul, I can't think of another Republican who is for reducing the military's budget.  Many on the Democrat side would love to redirect funds from the military to education and healthcare, but they're limited by moderate Democrats who represent purple or red districts.  Parties are not monoliths.  

On 2/3/2023 at 7:50 PM, Oldest Goat said:

Well it's just the audacity of them brazenly entering US airspace, over nuclear silos no less. It comes across as posturing and then it's a question of, to what end? Do they want to escalate?

So I take it you're not on TikTok then?  

[downzy]

On 2/6/2023 at 1:55 PM, Oldest Goat said:

Having the corrosive element of tribalism from the beginning, even if at times it's been worse, isn't an excuse. Unless there's a competition to be the most chimpesque, none of us should ever be forming opinions and making decisions based on something as loathesome as tribalism.

You're missing the point.  Human beings have always been tribal.  American history is a story of factions battling factions, some ways healthy, in other ways not.  You're naive if you think that human beings, let a lone those who enter into politics, to ignore these base instincts.  Much of what we believe and how we behave are products of our history and those we have the fortune (or misfortunate) associating with.  You may think you're beliefs are your own, but that's simply not true.  Had you grown up in a different time or under different circumstances you most certainly would have different beliefs.  

The question isn't whether there's presence of tribalism, but the merits of what that tribe advocates for or promotes.  It would be the same mistake for discounting something because you believe (even if true) it comes from a partisan source.  Whether something is partisan or tribal is secondary to whether it holds value, truth, or validity.

The Democratic party holds genuine and sincere policy prescriptions for many of today and tomorrow's challenges.  Who really cares if you think they're a bit too familiar with each other if what they propose to address challenges in healthcare, climate change, inequality, infrastructure and other policy areas is more effective than what their counter parts suggest.  And in this case, their political rivals have literally nothing to offer voters on most of those issues.  

On 2/6/2023 at 1:55 PM, Oldest Goat said:

No, they shouldn't, not if they care about more than themselves. It's bad enough having only two feasible parties, a one party system will lead to serious problems.

Why is that the Democrats fault?  If Republicans choose to remain an unserious political party, why should the Democratic party shoulder any of the blame?

On 2/6/2023 at 1:55 PM, Oldest Goat said:

Stuff like how stupid, delusional and militant LGBTQ2+ are. And it even goes beyond cultural politics because it's mandated and put into laws.

What's mandated or put into laws?  You're speaking in abstracts.

Moreover, what you perceive as delusional and militant, others see as marginal groups or communities finally having the space and freedom to argue their point after decades or centuries of discrimination, persecution, and targeting by actual militaries.  I don't always agree with some of the positions put forward by some in the LGBTQ community, but I'm not going to judge the entire group by some of their loudest members.  It's a shame that you do.

On 2/6/2023 at 1:55 PM, Oldest Goat said:

Although the 'far more' being gleaned by comparing to 'literally just this one douchebag, Rand Paul' doesn't inspire too much confidence.

The U.S. is a centre-right country with respect to who gets elected.  Had Democrats won two more Senate seats in 2020 they would have had the votes to reduce military spending, increase health care funding, introduce paid parental leave on the federal level, pass more aggressive legislation concerning climate change, possibly provide a public option for health insurance, pass real and comprehensive gun control legislation, and a lot of other policies that I think you would agree with.  But instead they had to rely on the votes of two senators who have acted more like moderate Republicans than Democrats.  Contrast that to what Republicans accomplished when they controlled all three branches of government between 2017-2019 (one huge tax cute for the rich and nothing else).  

[Rovim]

1 hour ago, downzy said:

You may think you're beliefs are your own, but that's simply not true.  Had you grown up in a different time or under different circumstances you most certainly would have different beliefs.    

I apologize for butting in before @Oldest Goat can reply, but are you saying that your beliefs are not your own? tribalism always existed and dictated behavior and beliefs of the masses, but it's not impossible to recognize the influence of internal and external bullshit default setting of our time and where we come from and if you can do that, it is possible to think for yourself eventually, at least for the most part when it comes to the important basic shit like when it's just a narrative that was told to you to make you think in a certain way to achieve control. Kinda like religion and politics.

we are programmed by enviroment, but eventually you can look to history and become objective enough to maybe see passed your own circumstances.

[downzy]

8 hours ago, Rovim said:

but are you saying that your beliefs are not your own?

No, of course not. 

People should still be held accountable for their opinions, beliefs, and values.

But the formation of each is largely the product of their environment.  A fourth generation slave owner is unlikely to see the error in his or her ways since that life is all they ever known.  That doesn't mean their beliefs or actions shouldn't be condemned and judged accordingly, but it is factually wrong that we all come from the same place with respect to who we have become.

8 hours ago, Rovim said:

tribalism always existed and dictated behavior and beliefs of the masses, but it's not impossible to recognize the influence of internal and external bullshit default setting of our time and where we come from and if you can do that, it is possible to think for yourself eventually, at least for the most part when it comes to the important basic shit like when it's just a narrative that was told to you to make you think in a certain way to achieve control. Kinda like religion and politics.

Sorry, I'm having a difficult time parsing through this one long sentence so not really sure how to respond.

8 hours ago, Rovim said:

we are programmed by enviroment, but eventually you can look to history and become objective enough to maybe see passed your own circumstances.

Agreed. 

My issue with Oldest Goat is the notion that one individual can rise above it completely.  Tribal influences can be both direct or subtle.  That the mere presence of groupthink is enough to invalidate the arguments made by one specific group.  Far more concern should be given to what the actual agenda, perspective, or position maybe rather than whether tribalism is playing a role in its formulation and promotion.  WE can care more that a position is the general consensus of, say, the LGBTQ community or we can give more attention to what the position states and whether it holds currency and value.  We can then also determine whether that position is deserving more attention or priority over competing or contrasting assertions held by other "tribes."

[Rovim]

22 minutes ago, downzy said:

No, of course not. 

People should still be held accountable for their opinions, beliefs, and values.

But the formation of each is largely the product of their environment.  A fourth generation slave owner is unlikely to see the error in his or her ways since that life is all they ever known.  That doesn't mean their beliefs or actions shouldn't be condemned and judged accordingly, but it is factually wrong that we all come from the same place with respect to who we have become.

Sorry, I'm having a difficult time parsing through this one long sentence so not really sure how to respond.

Agreed. 

My issue with Oldest Goat is the notion that one individual can rise above it completely.  Tribal influences can be both direct or subtle.  That the mere presence of groupthink is enough to invalidate the arguments made by one specific group.  Far more concern should be given to what the actual agenda, perspective, or position maybe rather than whether tribalism is playing a role in its formulation and promotion.  WE can care more that a position is the general consensus of, say, the LGBTQ community or we can give more attention to what the position states and whether it holds currency and value.  We can then also determine whether that position is deserving more attention or priority over competing or contrasting assertions held by other "tribes."

I think a distinction should be made between how much a person can use the tools of technology in his disposal in a modern world in a democratic country to a fourth generation slave owner, just as an extreme example. My point (in that one long sentence) 

is that if a person doesn't know himself enough or the reasons for why he has negative opinions about others who are different than him, it doesn't mean that with enough self reflection/eduction it's not possible, through critical thinking and enough time to rid oneself from "programmed thinking" partly, just enough so you can form your own views with very little tribalism involved. It's a psychological process as well.

and we don't come from the same place, and the eviroment is a part of us, but if the goal is acceptance of even very different people, I feel like that is doable and there is no shortage of people who have freed themselves from limiting and misguided beliefs.

 

 

Edited February 8, 2023 by Rovim

[downzy]

4 hours ago, Oldest Goat said:

So that we may arduously work with core values such as honesty, integrity and compassion, to manage them and hopefully do better when/where necessary for all our sakes while avoiding poisonous, idiotic, distractions like tribalism.

All of that can be done within a tribe.  One group of people can aim for all of those virtues while another group may opt for their opposites.  Should both groups then be treated with the same derision?

4 hours ago, Oldest Goat said:

But if you're playing a game of ping-pong and your opponent is having a fit on the floor spasming and frothing at the mouth making a mess of themselves, the game and for all involved...at a certain point, it's best to stop masturbating over the currently easy victory and be gracious enough to check on them and treat it as the UNITED States of America - no matter how misguided and fucked up they may be.

Agreed, save for the fact that this opponent wants absolutely nothing to do with being united.  Do you not find Republican concerns about the LGBTQ's drive for inclusion (even if you personally find it overbearing) somewhat trivial when compared to their widespread efforts undermine elections and subvert democratic institutions?   How do you "check in" on a party where the majority of its members still refuse to acknowledge base realities with respect to the results of the 2020 election?

How and why do you treat unserious people seriously?

4 hours ago, Oldest Goat said:

It's mandated in all sorts of stupid and terrible ways like pressure to unquestioningly comply, by changing science books to "pregnant person" instead of the correct "pregnant woman", making rules about transgenders using the bathroom of their choice, hiring quotas, imposing 'cis' terminology on normal people against their will, regularly bombarding everyone with their messaging even impressionable vulnerable children etc. They don't argue their points they want to simply dictate. They demand everyone participate in their sexuality/mental illness/delusions/kinks whatever it is.

Right, so this is all about your issues with trans people.  Moreover, you still having provided any specifics as to what the US government, whether federal or at the state level, has done with respect to legislation and laws that have anything to do what you're talking about.  Last time I checked, there has been no law passed at the federal or state level that does anything you have listed. 

4 hours ago, Oldest Goat said:

misguided pandering to the extreme or virtue signalling that goes on.

If I'm being honest, you strike me as someone who is overtly sensitive to this issue.  What you see as bombardment or dictating, others see as people advocating for respecting their personal choices and their basic rights as human beings.  The fact that you label non-trans people as "normal" is indicative of how you truly feel about these people.  And look, that's your choice to feel however you want to feel.  But if you're going to be so public about those opinions, do not bemoan others for taking issue with them and then hiding behind lazy arguments of "tribalism," cancel culture, or political correctness. 

I've walked into a bathroom and seen trans-individuals using the same facilities.  The first few time it felt strange and something I noticed.  But is my feeling uncomfortable their problem or is it mine?  Why is their action or presence in this matter anymore indicative of tribalism on their part and not mine?  

4 hours ago, Oldest Goat said:

Perhaps I'm too cynical but I think even with those two extra senate seats, still, no real change would have happened.

It is cynical and it's also ignore the fact that the federal government has done a lot in the last two years, despite handicapped by Senators Machin and Sinema.  

A big problem most people make in their understanding of American politics relates to the efficiencies of governance.  Policy changes in the US move at a glacial pace.  But it was designed to be slow.  The American system was a response to monarchal rule, where things could change based on the whims of one person.  Checks and bugs is a designed feature, not a bug.  Change requires coalition building and broad consensus, hence it's rare that the US produces drastic policy changes.  But even with those inherent obstacles, Democrats at the federal level were able to pass substantial policy measures that will take years, if not a decade or two to take effect.  Contrast that with what Republicans have done when they had the means to pass their agenda and it's night and day.  

Instead, what we see is what was advocated by Sarah Huckabee Sanders in her response to Biden's SOTU speech:

"The dividing line in America is no longer between right and left.  It’s between normal and crazy.  Every day we are told we must partake in their rituals, salute their flags, and worship their false idols. All while Big Government colludes with Big Tech to strip away the most American thing there is: your freedom of speech. That’s not normal. It’s crazy, and it’s wrong."

It's all just a bunch of moronic gibberish that is unmoored from any sense of reality.  So yeah, while the LGBTQ community can get a bit over their skis at time, I'll take their excesses and occasional Democratic hubris around this issue over the craven, cynical, and disingenuous nonsense that gets passed as the Republican party's reason for existence these days.  

We can spend most of our time arguing over what to do with an increasingly burning planet or we can argue about the apparent inherent dangers of someone who identifies with as a woman who uses a woman's bathroom.  Let's pick better priorities to spend on our time on. 

4 hours ago, Oldest Goat said:

With one asterisk on gun control; in USA, I really don't think banning guns is that feasible.

Few are arguing about outright bans.  Universal background checks, more onerous training and licensing requirements, smaller clip sizes, ownership insurance, limiting open and closed carry access, etc.  There is a lot America could do to curb gun violence if the radical fringe on this issue were willing to engage in a genuine discussion.  But they aren't, and since their tribal beliefs apparently trump sane measures to reduce gun violence, blood will continue to flow.

 

[downzy]

22 minutes ago, Rovim said:

and we don't come from the same place, and the eviroment is a part of us, but if the goal is acceptance of even very different people, I feel like that is doable and there is no shortage of people who have freed themselves from limiting and misguided beliefs.

Again, very much agree.

But this discussion is within the context of the presence of tribalism, and whether that negates the ideas and opinions produced within a given group.

I guess what i'm trying to argue is that merely demonstrating the presence of one group acting as a group doesn't render their agenda or perspective as false or irrelevant.  We are who we are in part by the ties we keep and the influence of what surrounds us.  I have yet to meet a single person that is truly objective.  No matter how hard I try, I know that my ability to evaluate will always be tinged and affected by my own experiences and influences.  Hence I'd rather focus my attention and energies on the merits of a position, and not on whether such a position or born from certain tribal influences.  

[Rovim]

52 minutes ago, downzy said:

Again, very much agree.

But this discussion is within the context of the presence of tribalism, and whether that negates the ideas and opinions produced within a given group.

I guess what i'm trying to argue is that merely demonstrating the presence of one group acting as a group doesn't render their agenda or perspective as false or irrelevant.  We are who we are in part by the ties we keep and the influence of what surrounds us.  I have yet to meet a single person that is truly objective.  No matter how hard I try, I know that my ability to evaluate will always be tinged and affected by my own experiences and influences.  Hence I'd rather focus my attention and energies on the merits of a position, and not on whether such a position or born from certain tribal influences.  

fair enough. I don't think it's possible for a person to be truly objective. I believe that part of what makes us human is our subjective perception.

as for LGBTQ+, and the opinion that their approach is aggressive in some areas, I would tend to agree, but it's not like conservatives are not playing rough as well and I think that sometimes for real progress to happen, at first it's gotta be aggressive so there is no option for people who would love it if we went back to the dark ages by denying minorities from their right to be themselves to succeed.

seems that it's a real scary thought to give people the freedom to be different, and the way transphobia is used in the US as a political tool by evil idiot grifters is a travesty imo. You know they can't let the chance to use hate to get more votes to go to waste.

Edited February 8, 2023 by Rovim

[downzy]

36 minutes ago, Rovim said:

as for LGBTQ+, and the opinion that their approach is agressive in some areas, I would tend to agree, but it's not like conservatives are not playing rough as well and I think that sometimes for real progress to happen, at first it's gotta be agressive so there is no option for people who would love it if we went back to the dark ages by denying minorities from their right to be themselves to succeed.

That's the thing; a lot of the language used by those against the LGBTQ community is eerily similar to the language used by segregationists in their fight to keep races separate prior to the 1980s and 1990s.  

Advocates for LGBTQ the community can be aggressive, if not hostile at times, but it's not as if the other side is nothing but pleasant and sanguine.  As I mentioned earlier, marginalize communities have been coping and managing with discrimination, violence, and oppression for as long as we have record for.  I have a hard time faulting them for being a bit too excessive in their language and tactics in present times considering what they have been dealing with over the course of human history.  

36 minutes ago, Rovim said:

seems that it's a real scary thought to give people the freedom to be different, and the way transphobia is used in the US as a political tool by evil idiot grifters is a travesty imo. You know they can't let the chance to use hate to get more votes to go to waste.

And this is my point.  This is all Republicans have.  Politics has become synonymous with culture.  They have little to say on the actual pressing problems Americans and everyone else are facing.  Wealth inequality, rising and increasingly inhospitable oceans, healthcare challenges due to an aging population, effectively balancing domestic production with the need for international trade - these and other issues are absent in the conversations and speeches the Republican party have at present.  Instead they gin up anger and resentment on cultural issues because they don't have anything to seriously offer on issues that should take priority.  But we are to believe that Democrats are guilty of being tribal about these cultural issues (whereas Republicans are not) and hence are no worse or better in their political engagement.  It's nonsense.  

[dontdamnmeuyi2015]

Really disrespectful to President Biden how some Republicans made rude sounds or remarks as he spoke.

This shows are stupid and childish most of them are.  I commend Biden for standing up to them. Hopefully, the Republicans will try to pass a bill so Biden can VETO it.

I'm so ashamed of this government. Never has it been this bad.  I hope the American people realize what a bunch or morons some of those Republicans are and don't vote for them again. Shameful.

[dontdamnmeuyi2015]

2 hours ago, Oldest Goat said:

Doing that noble pursuit with a tribe/group is fine. However, doing it 'because' of the tribe/group or 'only' with the tribe/group - that is a corrupted and hollow endeavor, that's not doing it at all.

...I find your lack of faith, disturbing.

In all seriousness, reaching 100% objectivity 100% of the time, is probably only possible if you manage to somehow go beyond the inclinations of our human nature and attain enlightenment but even then you would have to carefully maintain, lest it slip away. Maybe all that matters is we all individually and collectively do our best to attain that, regardless, as if it were possible.

Deep down I think pretty much everyone would prefer to be generally united, including Republicans, whether they know it or not. Whenever somebody proves that wrong they're never at their best firing on all cylinders, are they? There's always something lacking one way or another even just for the moment.

Yes, compared to that, the issue of the LGBTQ's failings are relatively trivial and certainly should not be Priority A1. There's definitely bigger fish to fry.

Just to be clear, you don't pander or back down. You just do what you can as much as you can. You try to find any middleground no matter how small. You don't get lazy and dehumanize them or oversimplify.

Uhh I also referred to members of the LGBTQ as "normal" even going as far to state that'll be the majority of them. But you want to go in circles, skewing things, trying to cobble together a gotcha moment "Yeah well you also said normal people are normal so there! Shows how you really feel. *cough* transphobe. *cough*"

Like yeah okay whatever man. Fuck it then I'll not bother.

LBGTQ community is normal for them. You don't have to agree with it, but respect them and leave them be.

This is the 21st century and things are changing. Being gay isn't a choice, they are born that way.

Becoming Trans is a choice for them and if it feels right to them then it's okay by me. You don't have to like these changes, but respect it and move the fuck on.

So tired of people judging what's right for others. Leave them be to live the lives they are meant to live. What should it bother you? Does it change your life no!

LGBTQ+ community. Sorry hit the wrong key.

[downzy]

21 hours ago, Oldest Goat said:

Doing that noble pursuit with a tribe/group is fine. However, doing it 'because' of the tribe/group or 'only' with the tribe/group - that is a corrupted and hollow endeavor, that's not doing it at all.

So people who support trans rights only do so because it's the in tribe thing to do?  You understand how cynical that sounds right?

21 hours ago, Oldest Goat said:

Uhh I also referred to members of the LGBTQ as "normal" even going as far to state that'll be the majority of them. But you want to go in circles, skewing things, trying to cobble together a gotcha moment "Yeah well you also said normal people are normal so there! Shows how you really feel. *cough* transphobe. *cough*"

Apologies then.  I do not recall you referring LBGTQ individuals as normal.  

My best advice is to stay away from concepts of normality and majority when talking about groups or individuals.   

[SoulMonster]

11 hours ago, Oldest Goat said:

@SoulMonster

You think it's funny there's a lot of violence against transgenders, is that it?

No, not at all.

[SoulMonster]

55 minutes ago, Oldest Goat said:

Nah. I knew you'd say that LMFAO. The truth is you're just saying that because your transphobia has been called-out. Deny all you want. Even if you genuinely don't realise your own bigotry, it is there, subconsciously.

 

I am of course being facetious. But try to imagine being 'Oldest Goat' and receiving such weird obnoxious "the internet is just a big garbage can" bullshit. It's incredibly offputting. I've only experienced this type of thing on here. Literally nobody in the real world at any time has ever called me sexist/transphobe/bigot whatever. But that's what you and downzy tend to do.

Both of you - less so downzy and moreso you(you live to do this shit) - have the factory setting of blinders ON MUST ONLY EVER BE ON, you then pick a position, construct a narrative and you proceed to launch into a demonstration of an almost contempt for actual conversation/debate and just dictate. It is like you think an arrogant, condescending, jibing, passive aggressive war of attrition is a win. It's not. It's even more unreasonable than I I'm supposed to be. I find it baffling. It's unecessary too because bare in mind, people on here and plenty of people irl can disagree with me or criticise me and I listen without issue and don't just get all cunty about it, even if I disagree.

I don't know why you get so angry and go on these over-the-top rants, but in case you wondered: that's why I am laughing.

[SoulMonster]

2 minutes ago, Oldest Goat said:

So you're just an internet troll not to be taken seriously, got it.

And let's not pretend many other people don't share my thoughts on your behaviour.

Take it easy, nazi-boy.

Yeah, because I never engage in serious discussions .

As for why I don't particularly feel like jumping in this discussion with you is because I don't think anything good would come out of it. I mean, you have made your position very clear and I don't think I can make you change your mind where we disagree. So why bother? Besides, you are already at such a rage level and have started trying to insult me, I don't think any constructive debate is really achievable.  

[Guest]

I see Pence has been subpoenaed by Jack Smith, would be interesting to hear him mention why he refused to get in that car. 

[Coma16]

Is Biden facing jail time?

[AxlisOld]

On 9/13/2023 at 5:11 AM, Coma16 said:

Is Biden facing jail time?

That's fucking rich.

[SoulMonster]

Trump claims he is the victim of "the greatest witch hun of all times". I suppose he hasn't heard of the inquisition, either.