UPNetwork

UPNetwork (http://forums.upnetwork.net/index.php)
-   Debate (http://forums.upnetwork.net/forumdisplay.php?f=41)
-   -   American Politics (http://forums.upnetwork.net/showthread.php?t=4569)

Doppleganger 03-13-2020 07:59 PM

Trump apparently said that the US federal government was going to start buying a ton of the cheap Saudi/Russian oil...which is actually very smart, had he said this yesterday.

It puts the US in debt and the money spent doesn't immediately work for the federal government, but it helps the US become independent of foreign oil WITHOUT being dependent on high oil prices, as the shale industry needs to be.

This doesn't excuse the coronavirus catastrophe but it's possibly the best move to stop the blood letting from the Russian/Saudi price war, and protects the shale industry.

Shuckle 03-14-2020 12:57 PM

trump socializing the oil and gas industry tbh

phoopes 03-14-2020 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doppleganger (Post 838932)
Trump is indeed toast but there's no other options, really. Trump/Hillary and Trump/Biden/Sanders are all foul choices, so there's little way to punish Trump for ineffectual leadership.

I might still end up voting for him just because the other 3 years do matter, but the inability to handle a crisis starts with recognizing it as a crisis.

So dumb!

I get not liking any of the candidates. I really do. I'd like to hear your logic though for why Trump is the least bad out of everyone because the only people I know that still support him are his base of delusional racists. Like... I really can't wrap my head around how anyone is on the fence about him at this point? It seems like a very love him or hate him decision to me.

Doppleganger 03-14-2020 05:04 PM

I originally voted Trump on a single platform, him vetoing the Trans-Pacific Partnership. He did that and the amended deal is a shadow of what the original was. Trump sort-of undid the benefit of this by nixing net neutrality, but companies were boldly violating it even before official rollback.

I want Google to be impartial for information but there's no laws in place to shape that, so outside of regulation on "tech companies", net neutrality wasn't going to help much beyond wiping Infinitychan off the clearnet.

So I have no strong leanings for Republican or Democrat as of 2020. So why stay with Trump when he's ineffectual and a detestable person?

My main issue is consolidation. The Democrats have too many dissenting voices since they're more an "anti-Republican" party than a coalition of ideologically-united individuals. The heartbeat of their party are unreliable voters.

Obama is the poster child for how even a popular, well-meaning president cannot overcome a unified voting block. If Obama couldn't pass policy, or he passed policy that can be easy rolled back, there isn't a snowball's chance in heck of Biden or Sanders doing anything notable. Granted, there are multiple schisms in the Republican Party now, but those schisms aren't a barrier to Republicans uniting together. It's a bigger issue with the Democrats where they're unable to agree or negotiate.

To explain this via analogy, let's say that you're on a boat, stranded in the middle of the pacific ocean. You want to get back to the United States.
if you put a Republican in charge, they'll steer you toward Russia or Iran. It's the wrong direction, and you might not make it there, but you're heading somewhere.
If you put the Democrats in charge, they'll tug at the steering wheel and you may not move at all, or go in circles, or potentially head back to the US and turn around and go back.

As Concept says this is a flaw of the two-party system, but I would rather have solid policy put in place that I can work around, rather than something transient that gets reversed after a couple years.

From my frame of reference, Obama and Trump haven't really shaped the world in the way GWB (especially) did, or Clinton before him. I vividly remember how those presidential policies shaped my world growing up but I've been relatively untouched by the last two presidencies.

And while I dislike Trump, I think that his ego limits him for better and worse. If he was actually cunning, his ability to shrug off controversy would be very dangerous. He's very transparent and easy to understand, and in a weird way that predictability is...comforting?

I feel like I can trust Bernie Sanders too, as he's ideologically motivated, but I can't trust the Democratic Party or Bernie's ability to flatten Republican opposition. And Biden is a puppet for an institutional illuminati, given how tired and mentally addled he is.

I feel like the Democratic Primaries were ill-timed. Trump mishandled coronavirus, but the Democrats might not be able to take advantage of it. If the country recovers in 6 months as the markets will, Trump v. Biden or Sanders will be a poor matchup. Someone like Buttigieg could have made an enticing option if the primaries were happening while the country was mired in fear.

Toyo 03-17-2020 07:48 PM

how are you gonna get to Iran from the pacific ocean

Doppleganger 03-18-2020 12:18 AM

I picked two "land-locked" countries that are enemies of the US to illustrate a "futile, dangerous, wrong direction" but I forgot eastern Russia actually borders the Pacific Ocean.

Let's just say "Tehran" and "Moscow".

Shuckle 03-18-2020 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doppleganger (Post 838963)
My main issue is consolidation. The Democrats have too many dissenting voices since they're more an "anti-Republican" party than a coalition of ideologically-united individuals. The heartbeat of their party are unreliable voters.

I'll give you the second point, but in my home state of Virginia we actually got a strong local blue wave in 2018 and we've been getting shit done (this link is a little bit pepega but it's a state website and you can't expect these things to work every time). This is for the 2019 session ALONE (aka, this started in November of 2018). It's great work - conservation, health care, social work, welfare, and even campaign finance reform. I have no doubt that sometime this year, Virginia will raise its minimum wage to $15/hr.

Democrats get shit done. The idea that they're unreliable or wishy-washy is just not true. The problem with Republicans is not that they are going in the wrong direction, but that they are actively lying to people and publicly standing up in defense of whatever hot-button religious issue is sweeping the evangelicals (until they lose and then they pretend like they don't care about gay marriage anymore), and using that political power to enrich themselves and their buddies in big business. How much money has big pharma made off the covid crisis as a result of Trump's wheeling and dealing?

Doppleganger 03-18-2020 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shuckle (Post 839109)
I'll give you the second point, but in my home state of Virginia we actually got a strong local blue wave in 2018 and we've been getting shit done (this link is a little bit pepega but it's a state website and you can't expect these things to work every time). This is for the 2019 session ALONE (aka, this started in November of 2018). It's great work - conservation, health care, social work, welfare, and even campaign finance reform. I have no doubt that sometime this year, Virginia will raise its minimum wage to $15/hr.

Democrats get shit done. The idea that they're unreliable or wishy-washy is just not true. The problem with Republicans is not that they are going in the wrong direction, but that they are actively lying to people and publicly standing up in defense of whatever hot-button religious issue is sweeping the evangelicals (until they lose and then they pretend like they don't care about gay marriage anymore), and using that political power to enrich themselves and their buddies in big business. How much money has big pharma made off the covid crisis as a result of Trump's wheeling and dealing?

I'm talking about national policy. What happens at local or state level is a completely different ballgame, and varies by a region's geography and economy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shuckle (Post 839109)
The problem with Republicans is not that they are going in the wrong direction, but that they are actively lying to people and publicly standing up in defense of whatever hot-button religious issue is sweeping the evangelicals (until they lose and then they pretend like they don't care about gay marriage anymore), and using that political power to enrich themselves and their buddies in big business. How much money has big pharma made off the covid crisis as a result of Trump's wheeling and dealing?

Both parties are using the same tactics, I think Republicans are just a bit more transparent about intent. The other major difference is, like I said, nationally Republicans are more willing to vote together than Democrats are, and that's a consequence of Democrats adopting the anti-Republican stance.

For example, across all the Republican factions I'd feel confident saying they're homogenously religious, pious and Christian. On the Democrat side you have Christians, but also religious sects that hate Christians, and atheists who actively dislike all religions. On any agenda related to religion, like something related to Scientology, the Democrats are going to have more problems unifying under a position.

Shuckle 03-18-2020 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doppleganger (Post 839114)
Both parties are using the same tactics, I think Republicans are just a bit more transparent about intent. The other major difference is, like I said, nationally Republicans are more willing to vote together than Democrats are, and that's a consequence of Democrats adopting the anti-Republican stance.

Not being transparent about tactics is the first step towards not using those tactics.

This is actually a common sentiment I see from Republicans/Trumpublicans and it really is not true. Yes, there's shady shit that happens on the left. That does not draw a false equivalency between them and the very public shit that happens on the right.

I was the one, you will recall, who was standing up in defense of conservatives because they aren't bad people. And I still feel that way! I don't think it's wrong to be conservative. But what I do think is wrong is using those conservative ideas and tenets to push this blatant wealth-funneling hypercapitalist proto-fascist scheme the way they're doing with Trump. And then having the gall to try to argue the Democrats are doing exactly the same thing, they're just not being blatant about it, and therefore it's okay.

When they said "The lesser of two evils," that means you try your damnedest NOT to choose the GREATER of two evils. And they ALSO say "better the devil you know than the devil you don't." By literal common sense, there is zero reason to support the Republicans if you are aware of the shady shit they're doing, just because you think the Democrats aren't perfect.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doppleganger (Post 839114)
For example, across all the Republican factions I'd feel confident saying they're homogenously religious, pious and Christian. On the Democrat side you have Christians, but also religious sects that hate Christians, and atheists who actively dislike all religions. On any agenda related to religion, like something related to Scientology, the Democrats are going to have more problems unifying under a position.

There's nothing pious about the Pentacostals, so you're really not approaching the right conclusions here. Yes, the right is more together (the left falls apart, the right falls in line), but that doesn't automatically mean that the left is going to (in your analogy) move in the correct direction towards california and then try to reverse it and go towards japan.

If you want to know what the left wants, go reread Hillary Clinton's laundry list of policy positions. That's what the left wants pretty verbatim.

Doppleganger 03-18-2020 10:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shuckle (Post 839115)
Not being transparent about tactics is the first step towards not using those tactics.

Absolutely not. This is a very dangerous way of thinking. Transparency is always better than the lack thereof if you're mature enough to cope.

Example, let's look at AVG Anti-Virus' privacy policy.

They openly admit that, in exchange for anti-virus services, they will sell everything their program scans on your computer, including your name, your passwords, and credit card number.

AVG is brutally honest but they're also one of a handful of free anti-virus out there. There's no guarantee that the paid anti-virus companies like McAffee or Norton don't do this, and it would be folly to think that Avast is also safe because they don't admit to the same policies as AVG.

So who do you trust in this situation, the people who are honest, or the people who won't admit to anything? Ultimately, I think it's easier to pivot around AVG when they're that transparent, like falsify all your information on your PC to scramble their scans, and I have the same attitude about Trump.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shuckle (Post 839115)
This is actually a common sentiment I see from Republicans/Trumpublicans and it really is not true. Yes, there's shady shit that happens on the left. That does not draw a false equivalency between them and the very public shit that happens on the right.

The only reason you think there's a false equivalency is because you're downplaying the importance of transparency, which I something I completely disagree with. Trump sucking but being easy to predict makes him superior to Biden who is not going to be Obama 2.0. I would vote for Obama's third term over Biden's first.

Rich liberals and rich conservatives want to stay being rich, and they're going to vote against candidates like Warren or Bernie who want to take their wealth away. Bloomberg entered the Democratic race specifically to squash Warren and Bernie's campaign, since he perceived Joe Biden as too weak to beat them.

Trump is a liar, but he's so consistent about it I know how he actually thinks. His thoughts and behaviour is so telegraphed I don't need a second hand account with personal access to understand him, I can do it from a primary perspective. That is a good thing, even if I dislike the man.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shuckle (Post 839115)
I was the one, you will recall, who was standing up in defense of conservatives because they aren't bad people. And I still feel that way! I don't think it's wrong to be conservative. But what I do think is wrong is using those conservative ideas and tenets to push this blatant wealth-funneling hypercapitalist proto-fascist scheme the way they're doing with Trump. And then having the gall to try to argue the Democrats are doing exactly the same thing, they're just not being blatant about it, and therefore it's okay.

I don't remember and I don't know what you mean when you use "conservative". You are the first to talk about ideology, I've been pretty consistent talking about the political parties.

The Republican Party is made up of legacies, traditional conservatives, Christians, neocons, tea partiers, and male power/incels. Neocons were always a minority who disproportionately had influence over the Republican Party, but they are not the dominant voice anymore.

True conservatives have been a minority in the Republican Party for a long time, and they've never been more marginalized.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shuckle (Post 839115)
When they said "The lesser of two evils," that means you try your damnedest NOT to choose the GREATER of two evils. And they ALSO say "better the devil you know than the devil you don't." By literal common sense, there is zero reason to support the Republicans if you are aware of the shady shit they're doing, just because you think the Democrats aren't perfect.

I think that's a lazy way to think of things. You're not even considering that the alternative could be worse, and that's even ignoring stuff like the Hunter Biden nepotism.

I might arrive at the same decision of voting Democrat but it won't be for such a simplistic, binary reason like that. It would be after careful consideration.

Even for a candidate like Buttigieg, who I liked, I wouldn't want him to get slammed with blame for an epidemic or recession that's not his fault. I was also anxious about his lack of experience. I would be perfectly fine voting for him under better circumstances, but not now.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shuckle (Post 839115)
There's nothing pious about the Pentacostals, so you're really not approaching the right conclusions here. Yes, the right is more together (the left falls apart, the right falls in line), but that doesn't automatically mean that the left is going to (in your analogy) move in the correct direction towards california and then try to reverse it and go towards japan.

Politics since the Bush era has been completely partisan with little venue for compromise. The parties are content for a feast-famine cycle, and in the rounds since the Republicans have come out on top, even when Obama was president. Obama's rule was done through executive order and so was easy to undo, including affordable healthcare.

I don't have health insurance right now and have been uninsured since I left the military. Trump waiving the penalties for being uninsured has basically destroyed Obamacare, even if he hasn't officially pruned it out of law. Permitting pharmacies to buy health insurance companies to skirt around HIPPA also happened under Trump's watch, meaning that there's even less incentive for someone like me to get insurance. It's $125 a month for something little better than a life insurance policy for a living person.

Republicans were also able to stack the Supreme Court with Republican judges, meaning the groundwork is in place for Republican influence to dominate the next 25 years of jurisdiction.

All of that came about from better mobilization and leadership than on the Democratic side. There is a unilateral push toward a certain future, like it or not.

From all that I get the impression Democrats have shoddy leaders and are just plain ineffectual. The past 20 years have been dominated by their politics.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shuckle (Post 839115)
If you want to know what the left wants, go reread Hillary Clinton's laundry list of policy positions. That's what the left wants pretty verbatim.

Again, no weasel words please. I'm specifically talking about the political parties. I don't even know if Hillary's policies are even doctrine for the Democrats anymore.

Shuckle 03-19-2020 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doppleganger (Post 839157)
Absolutely not. This is a very dangerous way of thinking. Transparency is always better than the lack thereof if you're mature enough to cope.

What?



Quote:

Example, let's look at AVG Anti-Virus' privacy policy.

They openly admit that, in exchange for anti-virus services, they will sell everything their program scans on your computer, including your name, your passwords, and credit card number.
OK. So you shouldn't use that.

Quote:

AVG is brutally honest but they're also one of a handful of free anti-virus out there. There's no guarantee that the paid anti-virus companies like McAffee or Norton don't do this, and it would be folly to think that Avast is also safe because they don't admit to the same policies as AVG.
Sure there is. A legal guarantee. If they steal and sell your info, they are breaking the law by not notifying you. Yes, you still get your info stolen, but you can file a lawsuit and take em to the cleaners in exchange. It is therefore...better...to be protected...from the bad shit...that their competitors are doing.

Quote:

So who do you trust in this situation, the people who are honest, or the people who won't admit to anything? Ultimately, I think it's easier to pivot around AVG when they're that transparent, like falsify all your information on your PC to scramble their scans, and I have the same attitude about Trump.
Here are your choices:

1. You MIGHT get your info stolen IF the company is unethical, with the government POSSIBLY backing you up with legal protections
2. You WILL get your info stolen BECAUSE the company is unethical, with the government NEVER backing you up with legal protections

Quote:

The only reason you think there's a false equivalency is because you're downplaying the importance of transparency, which I something I completely disagree with. Trump sucking but being easy to predict makes him superior to Biden who is not going to be Obama 2.0. I would vote for Obama's third term over Biden's first.
Not only that, but Trump is the LEAST transparent president ever. The only thing he's open about is a.) his mild bigotry and b.) illegally funneling millions of dollars into his resorts.

Quote:

Rich liberals and rich conservatives want to stay being rich, and they're going to vote against candidates like Warren or Bernie who want to take their wealth away. Bloomberg entered the Democratic race specifically to squash Warren and Bernie's campaign, since he perceived Joe Biden as too weak to beat them.
Wait wait wait. Hold on. I thought you said that the Democrats weren't transparent. Now they ARE transparent, but only about high taxes? Even though you just said they were doing the exact same thing? So actually, bernie and warren are BOTH telling the truth about wanting a wealth tax?

Quote:

Trump is a liar, but he's so consistent about it I know how he actually thinks. His thoughts and behaviour is so telegraphed I don't need a second hand account with personal access to understand him, I can do it from a primary perspective. That is a good thing, even if I dislike the man.
Yes. It's telegraphed. It's telegraphed that he is ALWAYS going to make the wrong decision.

Why are you taking the 100% chance to do the wrong thing over ANY % chance to do the right thing? I'm so confused by this. I think you've tricked yourself into supporting Trump.

Quote:

The Republican Party is made up of legacies, traditional conservatives, Christians, neocons, tea partiers, and male power/incels. Neocons were always a minority who disproportionately had influence over the Republican Party, but they are not the dominant voice anymore.

True conservatives have been a minority in the Republican Party for a long time, and they've never been more marginalized.
What? That's not true at all. True conservatives are the easily-swayed silent majority of the Republican party. Is this some kind of purity-culture thing?

Quote:

I think that's a lazy way to think of things. You're not even considering that the alternative could be worse, and that's even ignoring stuff like the Hunter Biden nepotism.
I am considering that the alternative could be worse. I don't want Biden. But I think that if you're legitimately thinking that any person or party could be "worse" than Trump because you can tell that he's always lying and you don't have the same kind of insight into Democrat lies is kind of a ridiculous assertion on its surface, and only gets clownier as you dive into the nuance. You'd rather vote for the guy who lies transparently about wanting to funnel hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars into his own pocket as opposed to the guy who doesn't even mention wanting to funnel hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars into his own pocket? What kind of choice is that?

Quote:

I might arrive at the same decision of voting Democrat but it won't be for such a simplistic, binary reason like that. It would be after careful consideration.
https://berniesanders.com/issues/

Quote:

Politics since the Bush era has been completely partisan with little venue for compromise. The parties are content for a feast-famine cycle, and in the rounds since the Republicans have come out on top, even when Obama was president. Obama's rule was done through executive order and so was easy to undo, including affordable healthcare.

I don't have health insurance right now and have been uninsured since I left the military. Trump waiving the penalties for being uninsured has basically destroyed Obamacare, even if he hasn't officially pruned it out of law. Permitting pharmacies to buy health insurance companies to skirt around HIPPA also happened under Trump's watch, meaning that there's even less incentive for someone like me to get insurance. It's $125 a month for something little better than a life insurance policy for a living person.

Republicans were also able to stack the Supreme Court with Republican judges, meaning the groundwork is in place for Republican influence to dominate the next 25 years of jurisdiction.

All of that came about from better mobilization and leadership than on the Democratic side. There is a unilateral push toward a certain future, like it or not.

From all that I get the impression Democrats have shoddy leaders and are just plain ineffectual. The past 20 years have been dominated by their politics.

Again, no weasel words please. I'm specifically talking about the political parties. I don't even know if Hillary's policies are even doctrine for the Democrats anymore.
This is 100% value judgments and the amount of data that would be necessary to correct it would be astronomical...with no actual payoff. I can't even be sure that you'd change your mind.

I can tell you that this is absolutely not the narrative that I understand the last couple decades to be; I think both of us are a little bit informed by a few exaggerations and propaganda pieces here and there, as well as people we know on either side.

As I understand it, the Democrats have been pushing for effective governance and the Republicans are stonewalling it. The Republicans are pushing for extreme deregulation and the freest possible market, which I believe to be unilaterally wrong. When you remove the idea of the "better-run" party, and just focus on what the election of either party would mean, the Democrats are just flatly better. We need to move back to the left because our leadership as a country has been overrun by far-right talking points and dark money from megacorporations. We can definitely do better.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:53 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.