Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
A Horse Named Stranger

U.S. Politics: Oh Donnie Boy, the Feds are calling...

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Seli said:

Utterly normal part of European history. Even immigrants keeping part of their culture alive is a long standing tradition. The Netherlands still has french-speaking churches which originated in the late 1500s when French speaking Calvinists fled the success of the Spanish armies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walloon_church

Of course alt-right types generally will claim that those historical movements were somehow different in kind to what is happening today.

Of course they were different --- Caucasoid migration is never the problem to these precious snowflakes. Dark people on the move is their nightmare.

You could call it projection, since the most prominent examples of migrants overwhelming and destroying native cultures have almost entirely been white people colonizing everyone else. And their terror at being outnumbered is informed by the fear that they might be treated the way white colonists have treated the cultures they conquered and subjugated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Heartofice said:

I think his popularity on the right is more to do with the way he's been able to highlight a lot of the hyperbole and hypocrisy of many far left arguments. His views do track pretty well along centre right lines, but in 2018 that would put him firmly in the Nazi camp.

You do know that Hilary Clinton would be center-right?  So when you talk about everyone being slightly centre right being classified as a Nazi, you are either being disingenuous or ignorant.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, ants said:

You do know that Hilary Clinton would be center-right?  So when you talk about everyone being slightly centre right being classified as a Nazi, you are either being disingenuous or ignorant.  

Maybe HeartofIce meant the new right. Hillary was definitely center-right of the George Bush party, but the Republican party really doesn't seem to match that anymore. That's how I took it, anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/1/2019 at 9:36 AM, lokisnow said:

In more cheerful news, the attacks on the robot scabs has finally started. _good!_

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/31/us/waymo-self-driving-cars-arizona-attacks.html

Hmm, I'm a big fan of driverless cars.  I believe it should long term be better for the environment than current systems and reduce accidents and all the hurts that come from them.  

These people do seem to be following in the Luddite tradition.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mitt Romney: The president shapes the public character of the nation. Trump’s character falls short.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/mitt-romney-the-president-shapes-the-public-character-of-the-nation-trumps-character-falls-short/2019/01/01/37a3c8c2-0d1a-11e9-8938-5898adc28fa2_story.html?utm_term=.73ae95b5703d

But policies and appointments are only a part of a presidency.

Quote

To a great degree, a presidency shapes the public character of the nation. A president should unite us and inspire us to follow “our better angels.” A president should demonstrate the essential qualities of honesty and integrity, and elevate the national discourse with comity and mutual respect. As a nation, we have been blessed with presidents who have called on the greatness of the American spirit. With the nation so divided, resentful and angry, presidential leadership in qualities of character is indispensable. And it is in this province where the incumbent’s shortfall has been most glaring.

 

Share this post


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

Mitt Romney: The president shapes the public character of the nation. Trump’s character falls short.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/mitt-romney-the-president-shapes-the-public-character-of-the-nation-trumps-character-falls-short/2019/01/01/37a3c8c2-0d1a-11e9-8938-5898adc28fa2_story.html?utm_term=.73ae95b5703d

But policies and appointments are only a part of a presidency.

 

My skepticism of GOP Senators standing up to Trump in substantive ways is fairly bottomless after Flake's many disappointments, but I was already thinking that Romney could just maybe be different.  Like Flake, he obviously can't stand Trump and knows what a disaster he is.  But unlike Flake he faces nowhere near the same potential in Utah, both where he is unusually strong, and where Trump's support comes from a bit of a different kind of Republican than Arizona, and also because he's coming in after Trump got a significant rebuke in the midterm rather than having just won the Presidency.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Simon Steele said:

Maybe HeartofIce meant the new right. Hillary was definitely center-right of the George Bush party, but the Republican party really doesn't seem to match that anymore. That's how I took it, anyway.

You're completely wrong. She's center right in European politics - like Angela Merkel - but she is far more leftist in American politics than any Republican for the last 50 years. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Rippounet said:

You're not wrong, but this type of "both-sides"-ism obscures the fact that among the various narratives of this or that group being abused there are some with far more merit than others.
In fact, one of the few things you and I may agree on is the fact that the multiplication of such narratives is meant precisely to obscure this fact.

I do agree with you in that there has been a multiplication of such narratives, but I'm not sure how you would determine which ones of them have more merit than others. What one can do -- and in fact what various "experts" across the world have done for a few decades -- is to measure various parameters which are important to them and conclude that according to the values of the "experts", some groups are worse off than others. This bolstered the claims of these groups and resulted in a redistribution of resources in their direction (and therefore away from certain other groups), but with the side effect of both these "experts" and people with expertise in many related fields being reviled and despised by a significant fraction of the population. The reaction of the "experts" and those affiliated with them has been to call the people who despise them names, but it doesn't help: there is no divinely provided set of values that qualifies people to consider themselves oppressed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Triskele said:

My skepticism of GOP Senators standing up to Trump in substantive ways is fairly bottomless after Flake's many disappointments, but I was already thinking that Romney could just maybe be different.  Like Flake, he obviously can't stand Trump and knows what a disaster he is.  But unlike Flake he faces nowhere near the same potential in Utah, both where he is unusually strong, and where Trump's support comes from a bit of a different kind of Republican than Arizona, and also because he's coming in after Trump got a significant rebuke in the midterm rather than having just won the Presidency.  

 

Romney might say some stuff but I doubt he does anything. I think he takes up Flake's mantel. 

That being said, he should be applauded for speaking out at the very least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Kalbear said:

You're completely wrong. She's center right in European politics - like Angela Merkel - but she is far more leftist in American politics than any Republican for the last 50 years. 

Look, I know you think she's the greatest ever, but she's not liberal. I try not to hold it against anyone who was conservative in their youth--people can change, but she didn't let go of so many conservative beliefs that I don't know how anyone could believe she isn't center/center right. That she was so cozy with Wall Street kind of takes away her "leftist" card. It's time to move on from Hillary. Republicans have been moving to the right for decades, and that is why Hillary exists right there in the center. If not to the right. Anyone who is as hawkish as she gets automatic R next to their name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, ants said:

You do know that Hilary Clinton would be center-right?  So when you talk about everyone being slightly centre right being classified as a Nazi, you are either being disingenuous or ignorant.  

It was a point about the over use of the term Nazi to describe anyone with even mildly conservative views. I’m sure Hillary has been called a Nazi at some point too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Martell Spy said:

Mitt Romney: The president shapes the public character of the nation. Trump’s character falls short.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/mitt-romney-the-president-shapes-the-public-character-of-the-nation-trumps-character-falls-short/2019/01/01/37a3c8c2-0d1a-11e9-8938-5898adc28fa2_story.html?utm_term=.73ae95b5703d

But policies and appointments are only a part of a presidency.

 

 

I have a few problems with Romney's article. But, this one in particular:

Quote

To reassume our leadership in world politics, we must repair failings in our politics at home.

In part, that begins with Dr. Franken-Republican taking some responsibility for the monster he created.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Martell Spy said:

Mitt Romney: The president shapes the public character of the nation. Trump’s character falls short. Also, I think the prospects of him giving me a job at this point are remote.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, mormont said:

 

Trump did give Romney a nice dinner  though. How ungrateful.

Edited by Martell Spy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, OldGimletEye said:

In part, that begins with Dr. Franken-Republican taking some responsibility for the monster he created.

Hahahahaha!  He'll take responsibility  for 1%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

https://fivethirtyeight.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/rakich-warren-1231.png?w=575

This is from a 538 article, so it looks like Warren is a perfect superposition of the |Hillary> and |Obama> wavefunctions (maybe a bit more Hillary than Obama). Also, I suck at embedding images, so if someone else can do it.....

Edited by IheartIheartTesla

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Mexal said:

Romney might say some stuff but I doubt he does anything. I think he takes up Flake's mantel. 

That being said, he should be applauded for speaking out at the very least.

Also, Flake hardened quite a bit in December, though it went mostly unnoticed because of HW Bush dying, then the shutdown, and the holidays. Flake held to his promise to block all judicial nominations (post-Kavanaugh of course) until McConnell brought the Mueller protection bill to a vote; McConnell never did and Flake never backed down. Of course, Flake is gone now and with the expanded 53 majority any one GOP senator has much less power; but all those potential judges will need to be renominated and go through the confirmation process all over again. Which will take time and every fewer day that most of them (since a handful are genuinely nonpartisan) are on the bench is a win.

Of course, with Democrats taking the House tomorrow, the Senate will have nothing to do but confirm judges. I doubt either side would block any actual deals made between Pelosi and Trump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, mormont said:

 

Wow, that seems really weak of him. He starts out strong and based on what he says, you feel like he should end with, "The prospects of me ever accepting a job from him are remote." 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, ants said:

Hmm, I'm a big fan of driverless cars.  I believe it should long term be better for the environment than current systems and reduce accidents and all the hurts that come from them.  

These people do seem to be following in the Luddite tradition.  

The entire history of humanity indicates that when something is made easier to consume by technology, it is consumed massively more. If driverless cars reduce the frictions of driving, making it easier for people to utilize single occupancy vehicles, then that means we are looking at a massively increased amount of vehicle miles travelled per person in single occupancy vehicles.

absent regulation restricting the technology to high occupancy vehicles, driverless cars are a disaster for the environment because increased VMT (and the increase in congestion from an increase in VMT) more than offsets any emissions gains from an all electric switch.

Also driverless cars, over the next thirty years will eliminate a net of about 400 million jobs globally, with nothing to ever replace them, massively increasing demands on the paltry safety nets most of which are not designed to support the permanent erasure of ten-twenty percent of their labor pool’s living wage employment, and as both access to single occupancy vehicles (as well as driving jobs) are enormously successful ladders out of poverty, we are also massively increasing inequality by trapping people into poverty with the implementation of this technology.

but hey, we have traded promises of safety for far less than the proposed safety trade driverless cars offer us.

Perhaps a new natural rate of unemployment of 15% and worse inequality is an excellent trade for an empty promise of increased safety?

Edited by lokisnow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×