• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Random Politics Thread

ceecee

CoolattaÂź Enjoyer
Joined
Apr 22, 2008
Messages
16,334
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
8w9
đŸ€Ł


us-vice-president-democratic-presidential-89421360_f6d18b.jpg
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
52,192
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I love that Tulsi Gabbard and Matt Gaetz coached Trump for the debate and it ended up exactly the way everyone else expected.
With friends like those, would the outcone have ever differed?
 

Virtual ghost

Complex paradigm
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
22,172
Jon Stewart summed it up nicely when he referred to having PTSD after the Biden catastrophe and said: "Finally we're back to typical debates where no one answers the damn questions!"

Overall though, Harris won the debate. Trump is so easy to play by simply pricking his ego. Like when Harris criticized his rallies and he wasted all of his response time talking about that. As per usual, neither candidate did a particularly good job of answering the actual questions. I don't think this debate will have much impact on voters positions.

I'd like to see a debate with some real hard core moderators that step in and interrupt the candidate when they reply with stump speech nonsense and don't directly answer the question.


The main problem with these debates is the premise that the process is based on intellectualism. What is the very questionable premise. Intellectually Harris evidently won the debate. But it isn't fully clear that this is the name of the game. In other words if this were the name of the game then Trump wouldn't be the candidate. Therefore if you are intellectual person that is seeking complex answers it is possible to read this debate in a wrong way. In other words if Harris doesn't get any visible bump out of this or that melts away over the next few weeks she is actually in trouble. On "270 to win" she leads by 0.8 points in Pennsylvania and 0.5 points North Carolina, what is probably something like 70 000 votes in practice. In other words if these states go red she wouldn't win the college (and the numbers are well within in the margin of error).


In about a week we should have better picture of what actually happened. If there is no blue bump it is time to panic.
 

Coriolis

Si vis pacem, para bellum
Staff member
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
27,511
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
The main problem with these debates is the premise that the process is based on intellectualism. What is the very questionable premise. Intellectually Harris evidently won the debate. But it isn't fully clear that this is the name of the game. In other words if this were the name of the game then Trump wouldn't be the candidate. Therefore if you are intellectual person that is seeking complex answers it is possible to read this debate in a wrong way. In other words if Harris doesn't get any visible bump out of this or that melts away over the next few weeks she is actually in trouble. On "270 to win" she leads by 0.8 points in Pennsylvania and 0.5 points North Carolina, what is probably something like 70 000 votes in practice. In other words if these states go red she wouldn't win the college (and the numbers are well within in the margin of error).


In about a week we should have better picture of what actually happened. If there is no blue bump it is time to panic.
Ideally, I see debates less as an intellectual exercise as a sort of interactive job interview. I want to know exactly where each candidate stands, and I want rational, supported explanations of apparent contradictions or changes in perspective. I doubt job applicants who avoid giving direct answers to so many questions would get hired for ordinary jobs. I agree that Harris significantly outperformed Trump in this debate, and given what our presidential debates have become - more show than substance - perhaps this was not the best venue for her to give those sorts of clear explanations, but if not now in front of the largest single audience she is likely to get, then when? I can envision very good answers to questions like how and why her position on fracking evolved, and wish she would just spell it out and move on.
 

Virtual ghost

Complex paradigm
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
22,172
Ideally, I see debates less as an intellectual exercise as a sort of interactive job interview. I want to know exactly where each candidate stands, and I want rational, supported explanations of apparent contradictions or changes in perspective. I doubt job applicants who avoid giving direct answers to so many questions would get hired for ordinary jobs. I agree that Harris significantly outperformed Trump in this debate, and given what our presidential debates have become - more show than substance - perhaps this was not the best venue for her to give those sorts of clear explanations, but if not now in front of the largest single audience she is likely to get, then when? I can envision very good answers to questions like how and why her position on fracking evolved, and wish she would just spell it out and move on.


She did exactly what was expected of her and that was truly the most logical thing to do in current situation.

However the fact that this is so close race points in the direction that you and me have kinda limited picture of the situation. What is logical to us it isn't to everyone ..... and that is the problem I am pointing at. If you think that intellectual approach is the right one she crushed him, however if that isn't your approach to life then all sort of conclusions are possible.

As a linked the other day: she leads him in Germany by 65 points. while in US she leads him by 2 points. That is the gap that kinda hunts me.
 

Kingu Kurimuzon

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2013
Messages
20,941
MBTI Type
I
Enneagram
9w8
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Much has been said of trump's unpolled support. I'm referreing to the fact he outperformed the polling numbers by several points in 2016 and 2020.

My hope this year is that Harris also has some support that isn't reflected in the current polling. One thing that could suggest this is the case is that enthusiasm hasn't been this high for a democratic candidate probably since 2008 or 2012. there's also the fact that we're seeing a record number of new voters registering and many are from demographics that traditionally support democrats. If these are recent registrations, then it's very possible this support is not really being reflected in many of the current polling models. As these newer voters begin to be captured in the polling, we could potentially see Harris continue to trend higher in the polls.

What this also means is that essentially the unpolled support for Harris could end up cancelling out trump's unpolled support, and that the numbers we're currently seeing are actually closer to reality.

However, we should not be overly optimistic lest we repeat 2016. VOTE. Do not assume a Harris win is a given. The republicans are still going to do anything they can to suppress the vote in close states and they are already prepared to launch court cases to contest any Harris wins
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
52,192
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Much has been said of trump's unpolled support. I'm referring to the fact he outperformed the polling numbers by several points in 2016 and 2020.

My hope this year is that Harris also has some support that isn't reflected in the current polling. One thing that could suggest this is the case is that enthusiasm hasn't been this high for a democratic candidate probably since 2008 or 2012. there's also the fact that we're seeing a record number of new voters registering and many are from demographics that traditionally support democrats. If these are recent registrations, then it's very possible this support is not really being reflected in many of the current polling models. As these newer voters begin to be captured in the polling, we could potentially see Harris continue to trend higher in the polls.

What this also means is that essentially the unpolled support for Harris could end up cancelling out trump's unpolled support, and that the numbers we're currently seeing are actually closer to reality.

However, we should not be overly optimistic lest we repeat 2016. VOTE. Do not assume a Harris win is a given. The republicans are still going to do anything they can to suppress the vote in close states and they are already prepared to launch court cases to contest any Harris wins
Yeah, I've been thinking somewhat similarly -- and yet am also happy to see Dems running scared which means they will not let up until voting is done. Complacency is dangerous. Let Trump tout his polls and how he is still winning, let Nate Silver beat his drum about Trump being ahead -- keep everyone on their toes, make them feel the urgency of getting as many votes for Harris as possible.

There is also the Electoral College issue, so it matters where the votes are coming from and not just how many more she is likely to get.
 

SensEye

Active member
Joined
May 10, 2007
Messages
882
MBTI Type
INTp
In about a week we should have better picture of what actually happened. If there is no blue bump it is time to panic.
It seems this election is destined to go down to the wire. I just can't see anything happening that would move the needle from this point on. Trump seems more and more delusional than he has ever been, but none of his supporters seem to care. Harris might be able to pick up a point or two in polling, but who knows if that even means anything in such a close race.

Harris popularity has seemed to peak as well, and she doesn't appear to plan to do anything to boost her ratings. I suspect her plan has already been fixed and she is going to repeat the same talking points from now until November. She seems scared to have an open press conference (I think she doesn't want to be pressed on her policy flip flops from 2020). I think it might benefit her to have such a presser (to silence the critics if nothing else), but she would have to tread carefully. It's possible more transparency would do her more harm than good.
 
Joined
Jul 24, 2008
Messages
22,429
MBTI Type
EVIL
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
I hate to say this but I don't think American politics is decided based on intellectual arguments. It's more about emotional appeals, the national mood, physical appearance, PR, and charisma. I don't know that I've ever seen someone become president because of the intellectual arguments they made.

I view the intellectual approach as heroic, but it may not be enough.

To paraphrase someone smarter than myself, this isn't ancient Greece, but ancient Rome. Better glam it up for the arena.
 
Last edited:

Coriolis

Si vis pacem, para bellum
Staff member
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
27,511
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I hate to say this but I don't think American politics is decided based on intellectual arguments. It's more about emotional appeals, the national mood, physical appearance, PR, and charisma. I don't know that I've ever seen someone become president because of the intellectual arguments they made.

I view the intellectual approach as heroic, but it may not be enough.

To paraphrase someone smarter than myself, this isn't ancient Greece, but ancient Rome. Better glam it up for the arena.
Sadly, you are correct in this. This is why, much as I would have preferred Harris as well as Trump stick to giving details of what they would do if elected, I know that is not the way for either of them to win votes. Sure - some viewers and news analysts criticized Harris for failing to do this, but I suspect she gained more support than she lost simply by "looking/acting presidential", footstomping her priorities with passion (e.g. democracy/rule of law, reproductive rights, supporting Ukraine), and besting Trump in the debate game.

There are many legitimate criticisms, or at least questions, about Harris' agenda. I would challenge any voter, though, who actually thinks Trump would be better. Yes, many of us have less money in our pockets than in the Trump years. Having more won't matter, though, if you can't get your medical needs met, or care for your family the way you want, or heaven forbid, really don't need/get to vote next time around.
 

Virtual ghost

Complex paradigm
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
22,172
It seems this election is destined to go down to the wire. I just can't see anything happening that would move the needle from this point on. Trump seems more and more delusional than he has ever been, but none of his supporters seem to care. Harris might be able to pick up a point or two in polling, but who knows if that even means anything in such a close race.

Harris popularity has seemed to peak as well, and she doesn't appear to plan to do anything to boost her ratings. I suspect her plan has already been fixed and she is going to repeat the same talking points from now until November. She seems scared to have an open press conference (I think she doesn't want to be pressed on her policy flip flops from 2020). I think it might benefit her to have such a presser (to silence the critics if nothing else), but she would have to tread carefully. It's possible more transparency would do her more harm than good.


I suppose that it is time that I put my cards on the table and show why I started this entire line of thought on the issue.

Not only that it is destined to get down to the wire but it is already there and we are some 8 weeks away from election day. In other words when there is a toss up around the country that almost always means that the Dems are in problems. However I will go into story over all this. As most of people here don't remember I also had national elections recently (this spring to be exact). In other words Croatia is also choosing it's parliament and person on the top every 4 years. However this year the main left party had a problem, they were stuck with party leader that wasn't really popular and thus electable. For that reason they decided to change the candidate (which is exactly why this "passing the torch thing" wasn't novel concept to me, since here political parties are doing it all the time).

Anyway, they made the change at the top however they have chosen the person that is both controversial and actually has a governing track record at the top. So this person wasn't really a new face. However all of that basically restarted the race anyway from the foundations and there was this "we aren't doomed" thing going on. Plus the polling visibly went up for the main left wing party. However due to high tensions and various dynamics the debates at the top were skipped.

Therefore after few weeks this whole campaign basically turned into a bla, bla, bla that is here just to pass the time. In the end the election day finally arrived and the turnout was the highest in many many years. So the left started to celebrate all over the internet. However then the shock moment came and early results were released: the people showed up but the results were right wing landslide. It was so bad that most of left wing ladership got drunk even if they knew that they had to do press conferences. Now how to best explain what happened here ? It is actually pretty easy. The left was constantly pushing this "abortion and safe us from dictatorship" story in the contrast to "economy and protecting the southern border" that was on the other side. What was the message that didn't really land in space and time. Especially since there was lack of details in the mix.


Therefore I dare to say: I think I saw this movie.
 
Joined
Jul 24, 2008
Messages
22,429
MBTI Type
EVIL
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
How does a person live in a dictatorship? What do you do to survive and/or fight back. I have no idea. 😞

If I tried to fake it I could say Melania is pretty but that’s all I’ve got to say that’s positive and honest for me. Should people re-register as Republican so they don’t bother you unnecessarily? I don’t want to see everyone hurt. I have no survival strategies. 😞
I've thought often of the possibilities of civil wars and dictatorships.

I don't have any plans specifically, but I think people can be very resilient. When you look back to history and see the conditions that people lived in, that people survived, you know it's possible.

You know, it used to be that I saw a fundamental difference between ourselves and the people of the past. Essentially, we were more evolved. I haven't seen it that way in a while. There is continuity. I think the biggest difference is in out devices, and how they effect our processing.

I digress. My main point is that people have it in them to survive nearly anything. I draw comfort from that.
 

Virtual ghost

Complex paradigm
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
22,172

With that story I focused on the bottom line, since I think there is legit parallel/warning in the story. However once you go into details things get pretty complicated, especially if you are US citizen. Since you have throw away your understanding of politics to understand things for what they are here. The first and obvious case of that is that here the left is Russia friendly and the right openly supports Ukraine and NATO integration. My right is pro COVID measures. My right is also doing green deal, socialized healthcare is standard for generations, there is free college .... etc. In other words my right doesn't have US style libertarian approach to things (and they don't ignore science openly). Which is why they are more electable than the right in US. However the difference in election results was so large that I made things more simple in my argument to show the point. Especially since economy, protecting southern border and family values were large part of the winning mix for the right. So in the end the difference was about 10 points country wide and in US that would mean that the map is almost completely red (my right came first in 8 out 10 regions). In other words the polls have openly missed in my case. Therefore if even fraction of this effect mixes into US toss up elections the red will win.

Maybe it wouldn't mix but the problem is that the dems are often low on details, they ignore certain problems and they are constantly going after the persona of Right wing leader. The approach that led my left into sound defeat and it can be argued that this approach lost the dems 2016 elections. In other words the message hole is obvious when you think about it: What the heck I am going to do with abortion rights when undocumented foreign men are roaming my street and I don't have that much to eat. I simply don't see that much of a difference between all these left wing campaigns. They are vague, overly personal and with deficit of focus on economy.
 
Last edited:

Virtual ghost

Complex paradigm
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
22,172
How does a person live in a dictatorship? What do you do to survive and/or fight back. I have no idea. 😞

If I tried to fake it I could say Melania is pretty but that’s all I’ve got to say that’s positive and honest for me. Should people re-register as Republican so they don’t bother you unnecessarily? I don’t want to see everyone hurt. I have no survival strategies. 😞

I can answer that one as well since I was born in dictatorship (the same one as Melania).

First, there are two types of dictatorships. Those that are generally stable and those that are unstable. If you live in a stable dictatorship then the life wouldn't be that different than you know it. The elections will be a sham or they wouldn't be any, but everyday should be relatively normal. In other words most dictators know that even if they are dictators they have to deliver. Otherwise there will be open rebellion or the establishment might find a more fitting person (to save their own asses). While if the dictatorship is openly unstable that will create mess, but that also means that the system wouldn't last for too long. The real problem is if dictatorship turns into a some kinds of long term civil war that will drag on for years. From experience I can say that is clearly the worst that can happen. Therefore if that happens you are in over your head.
 

Red Herring

middle-class woman of a certain age
Joined
Jun 9, 2010
Messages
7,917
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I've thought often of the possibilities of civil wars and dictatorships.

I don't have any plans specifically, but I think people can be very resilient. When you look back to history and see the conditions that people lived in, that people survived, you know it's possible.

You know, it used to be that I saw a fundamental difference between ourselves and the people of the past. Essentially, we were more evolved. I haven't seen it that way in a while. There is continuity. I think the biggest difference is in out devices, and how they effect our processing.

I digress. My main point is that people have it in them to survive nearly anything. I draw comfort from that.
I am not sure if people get used to war immediately around them, but (as Virtual Ghost said) most people in stable dictatorships lead normal lives.

According to the V Dem institute about 13% of the world's population lives in a fully fledged liberal democracy. The rest of mankind does not suffer and wriggle in pain 24/7 in some sort of hellhole. And if they suffer the main cause is usually poverty, not lack of freedom.

Quite a few people in the East of Germany miss the GDR. Now you and I might associate that state with heavy censorship, the Stasi wiretapping phones, opening letters, neighbors spying and reporting on each other and people getting shot for trying to leave the country. But I know someone who grew up there, her dad was a highranking civil servant, and she called it a "paradise for children". Many people miss the sense of community and the safety of being taken care of. You could live there just fine as long has you went along with things, kept your mouth shut and didn't try anything funny. If you were Arian the same thing can probably be said about nazi Germany. People went about their businesses, stood up, went to work, had lunch, kissed their kids goodnight. Rinse and repeat. Same thing in the Soviet Union. Many Russians seem nostalgic for that and quite happy under Putin. In Brazil, Bolsonaro supporters seem to romanticize their former military dictatorship that disappeared, tortured and murdered the opposition.

I went to Beijing for a brief visit this spring. Now, the internet is heavily censored, you need a VPN client to access the most basic Western websites. There is armed police everywhere. CCTV cameras everywhere. Digitalization is very advanced so that you can use your phone for everything and leave a thick data trail behind everything you do. State surveillance is near absolute. Censorship is obviously strong and people are known to be disappeared or arrested if they cause problems. Political freedom is extremely limited. But people there seemed not only just as happy and friendly as elsewhere, they sounded genuinely proud of their country and its accomplishments and took pride in how safe everything was and how there was hardly any crime because of the total surveillance (they also thought it's Taiwan and the West that are aggressive towards China and constantly provoking trouble, not the other way around).

Also, the degree of perceived freedom you grew up with is not normal, neither historically speaking nor crossculturally (the US is by far the most individualistic nation on earth anyway by most psychological surveys).

I am not saying liberal democracy isn't worth protecting and fighting for - on the contrary, I think it is a fragile, precious good that can easily slip from our fingers. When dementia sets in it is usually the outer brain regions that go first, the ones we develop the latest both as individuals and as a species, as far as I know. Similarly, we are risking slipping back into a cruder form of sociopolitical organization.

However, while human brains also seem hardwired to be sensitive to loss (and value a dollar lost more than a dollar won) and those used to a freer, more open society will definitely miss it, not only the supporters of the new more rigide regime but likely also many growing up under it will take the new normal for granted. And who knows, the pendulum can always swing back again.


That being said (as a small consolation in case of emergency), don't give up, fight the political dementia, fight like hell!!!
 
Top