|
Lightning Knight posted:I thought it had shifted to the BRICs - Brazil, Russia, India, China. The BRICS are dead, and there are honest questions now as to if they were ever even alive Also if you were ever pining for days when Putin or the CCP can check US power you have no idea how good it is that you ended up being wrong. Hodgepodge posted:Before that, it was Japan. It's the international politics version of car crash stories; some scary other is always going to rule the world because modernizing economies grow really quickly. But 1.3 billion people! 
Fojar38 fucked around with this message at 05:11 on Sep 5, 2016 |
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 05:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 17:24 |
|
|
McAlister posted:But yeah, pointing out that Obama wasn't ready was an absolutely legitimate criticism. It would be awesome if he knew everything he knows now and was starting his first term in November. But a couple years playing wallflower in the senate was insufficient preparation. Pointing out Obama is inexperienced is fine. Using the awful shot of "he'll get your children killed" is disgusting. There's a reason it's in the same 'effective' category as Swift Boat Veterans and the like. It being effective doesn't make it not disgusting.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 05:09
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:you're like 8 years late to the party on that one, there are no more global growth darlings, which is part of the reason the corporate global elite and their allies are freaking out Interesting. Well, I suppose it doesn't matter anyway, by the time anybody gets to a point where they could credibly challenge American international power global warming will be in full swing anyways.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 05:10
|
|
|
I think we should've elected Hillary in 2008 and reelected her in 2012 because that means Obama would be running now.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 05:11
|
|
|
How about South Sudan? It's not like they can really go downhill, so there's nowhere to go but up!
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 05:11
|
|
|
Ironically the best performing economy in the world right now is the USA, yet everyone acts like its in decline.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 05:11
|
|
|
Wikkheiser posted:I think we should've elected Hillary in 2008 and reelected her in 2012 because that means Obama would be running now. Knowing what I know now, I kind of agree with this sentiment. The current predicament we find ourselves in isn't unsalvageable and could be seriously worse, but all things considered we'd probably have been better off. Fojar38 posted:Ironically the best performing economy in the world right now is the USA, yet everyone acts like its in decline. No, you see, I can't get a factory job that pays 40 dollars an hour with full benefits and a pension after dropping out of high school, black people aren't literally slaves and I saw a Mexican dude down the street, ergo the economy is in the shitter because of (((globalists))). It's me, I was the Mexican dude who lives in a white neighborhood. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 05:14
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I thought it had shifted to the BRICs - Brazil, Russia, India, China. Russia and Brazil were so tied to oil that when the price collapsed so did their economy. China is desperately trying to engineer a soft landing instead of a crash. Mainly because the Communist party thinks if the economy tanks there will be a revolution. India is doing pretty ok. I mean it is a place where a god awful class divide where a small section of the country can enjoy a decent analog of the western middle class and the other billion people are still poor as gently caress. But it is better than it was. Xae fucked around with this message at 05:16 on Sep 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 05:14
|
|
|
iospace posted:RICs now, after Brazil turned into a open clownshow because of the Olympics. The S in BRICS is South Africa, and lol at that, since their currency has lost half it's value in the last four years. And afaik Russia is still coming to grips with the issues of being a petrostate when oil prices crash. Not to mention that the only reason the Chinese financial markets didn't cataclysmically implode last year was strict state control. I don't really know anything about the Indian economy, but BRICS are basically dead.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 05:15
|
|
|
fool_of_sound posted:The S in BRICS is South Africa, and lol at that, since their currency has lost half it's value in the last four years. And afaik Russia is still coming to grips with the issues of being a petrostate when oil prices crash. Not to mention that the only reason the Chinese financial markets didn't cataclysmically implode last year was strict state control. I don't really know anything about the Indian economy, but BRICS are basically dead. Oh poo poo the S stood for something? I was taught it was just a plural because ~reasons~.  But yeah all of that makes sense. I would say it's a shame but gently caress Russia and China, they're assholes. I hope India comes out ok though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 05:17
|
|
|
Xae posted:
The one pretty good thing China's been doing is slowly moving people into more urbanized environments and away from the traditional agrarian lifestyle. India by contrast is projected to have China's current level of urbanization in like 2050.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 05:17
|
|
|
computer parts posted:The one pretty good thing China's been doing is slowly moving people into more urbanized environments and away from the traditional agrarian lifestyle. India by contrast is projected to have China's current level of urbanization in like 2050. China has a huge advantage over India simply because their government is functional. Both are horrifically corrupt, but China's at least functions. In India the ticket to the upper middle class used to be to get a government job and collect bribes. It was hugely disruptive when people started making good money doing IT out sourcing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 05:19
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Wow gently caress Wallace. Is he even remotely better now? If he was better now he'd be out of work
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 05:22
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:Ironically the best performing economy in the world right now is the USA, yet everyone acts like its in decline. As mentioned, China's economy is a house of cards and it's unclear how long it will be sustainable for the government to keep throwing money at a big problem. Russia's a disaster, and Brazil is not only in a bad economic downturn but there was a bloodless coup that just occurred where the conservative party who hadn't won an election in ages managed to throw out the popularly elected president on trumped-up corruption charges. They of course are replacing her with a guy who is legally barred from running for office for 8 years due to a corruption conviction, and who is so unpopular he basically ran and hid during the Olympics.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 05:28
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Wow gently caress Wallace. Is he even remotely better now? Sir Tonk posted:https://twitter.com/jayrosen_nyu/status/772551303037915136
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 05:31
|
|
|
I wouldn't worry about Wallace, there is no chance Trump agrees to a third debate.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 05:32
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:Ironically the best performing economy in the world right now is the USA, yet everyone acts like its in decline. It's about relative comparisons, if you read Paul Kenndy it's more a function about how the US stands relative to it's peers in terms of capability and dozens of other indications of geopolitical soft and hard power. The obvious comparison is the British Empire, in that the early "lead" in economic growth and prosperity from being the Hegemon has been shrunk by the decrease in relative economic size compared to the growth in the rest of the world and this has had some consequences. But yeah the United States has done a much better job in comparison to Britain in how it maintains its position. Also a empire may be in decline but still have growth spurts, such as Justinian's reconquest of Italy, North Africa and Spain and came so close to maybe sticking.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 05:32
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:I wouldn't worry about Wallace, there is no chance Trump agrees to a third debate. I think he will grudgingly. Then of course get clowned on for a third time.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 05:35
|
|
|
Rick_Hunter posted:Speaking of Gen X. I don't like living in a world where we have to put what loving TV shows/movies the politician is famous for before their affiliation/state. Ventura (WWE) I-Minn Schwarzenegger (Terminator) R-California
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 05:40
|
|
|
I don't have nearly as much faith in the debates as you guys seem to. I think Hillary will be well-read and competent, but I don't think Trump will burn out and I don't think the moderators will have the spine necessary to stand up to him. The media will take the opportunity to push the horse race narrative as hard as they possibly can, too. Now, do I think that will be like, super bad for Hillary? Probably not. Debate performances won't help Trump with Hispanics and black people. I do think, however, that it's a toss up on whether or not it will improve his standing with white women, depending on how much control he exerts. I don't think we should take it for granted that he will be terrible at the debates. Terrible in a way that we understand, where he's a vapid empty shell with no meaningful policy acumen and clearly an unqualified clown? Yeah. But not in the way the average, remarkably stupid voter in America will appreciate, and that's what matters. I think the thread should prep itself for Trump "winning" the debates" like Romney one the first debate in 2012. It doesn't matter what we think, it matters what the electorate in general thinks.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 05:40
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Except they won't, because truck driving as it currently exists is not a high skill position. The problem isn't driver jobs disappearing, the problem is the downward pressure applied to the wages of drivers and that is going to have a significant economic impact on the macro economy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 05:40
|
|
|
Dead Cosmonaut posted:Self driving cars, as they are being done now using neural networks, are shunned by the controls field of academia for good reason. Lmao no
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 05:41
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I'm not surprised. I can't say I'm too broken up for the ones that willingly become hate Luton dupes to keep said elite in power even at their own expense.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 05:46
|
|
|
Petr posted:
Not really. Less than optimal is far from bad. And again, at the DNC Obama himself said Hillary is more prepared than he was. I guess that means Obama is a puma or something. Also every person in this thread who talks about how much more they like Obama now than they did in his first two years is clearly a racist. Anything but admitting that networking is a real thing with real benefits that Obama had not done much of in 2008. Or that practice makes people better at things. Now if you want to see me honestly not like someone - as opposed to trying to min/max the impact of candidates I like - get me started on Sanders. Jackass was supposed to start trying to defeat trump but instead he's using his reporter time to insinuate bullshit about the Clinton foundation.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 05:48
|
|
Holy poo poo, I didn't realize HillaryIs44 people were still around. Have the last 8 years been really hard for you?
|
Boon posted:The problem isn't driver jobs disappearing, the problem is the downward pressure applied to the wages of drivers and that is going to have a significant economic impact on the macro economy. And my point is the job function of the driver doesn't really change with automation. There's still going to have to be a dude who is certified to drive a big truck, has to be with said truck at all times, and has to keep an eye on the road in case something fucks up.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 05:53
|
|
|
Geostomp posted:I can't say I'm too broken up for the ones that willingly become hate Luton dupes to keep said elite in power even at their own expense. Yeah but that's just because people are stupid and selfish. I dunno. I mean I agree, abstract sympathy doesn't mean much in the face of actual bigotry. Racists are still racists and need to be poo poo on. It's just unfortunate that just as people are born into poverty and prejudice with no option, people are also born into the role of oppressors without ever having asked for it. The platitude of "life isn't fair" means a lot more than most people appreciate.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 05:55
|
|
|
Trump's going to do the Trump thing and talk over Hillary in the rudest possible way.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 05:59
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I don't have nearly as much faith in the debates as you guys seem to. I think Hillary will be well-read and competent, but I don't think Trump will burn out and I don't think the moderators will have the spine necessary to stand up to him. The media will take the opportunity to push the horse race narrative as hard as they possibly can, too. At least I hope that's what she does, it will make great television.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 06:02
|
|
|
Trapezium Dave posted:Hillary might be risk adverse and go full policy wonk but it seems obvious to me that the better approach is to repeatedly kick Trump in the ego until he fully melts down. I mean, we would probably love it. But the American electorate is stupid and would pull the "gosh she's just so rude!" garbage out because of double standards. Remember, Hillary is a woman. She's not allowed to be rude to a white male politician on national TV! I really don't have high hopes for the debates going well because of poo poo like that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 06:04
|
|
|
Petr posted:
Go check out Hillaryis44. They support Trump now.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 06:07
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:It's about relative comparisons, if you read Paul Kenndy it's more a function about how the US stands relative to it's peers in terms of capability and dozens of other indications of geopolitical soft and hard power. The US isn't in decline though, I would even argue that its "relative" decline has been overblown as gently caress. Comparisons to the British Empire aren't particularly apt.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 06:09
|
|
|
Xae posted:The best thing about the Generation War poo poo is that it always boils down to "NO YOU SHUT UP DAD" dressed up with pseudo intellectual bullshit. it's going to be fun when genx is in charge of things and the histrionics about MILLENIALS get cranked up past 11 because they themselves are basically millenials who came of age in a high-growth economy with much cheaper college and healthcare and by "will be" i mean jon chait already exists and is hugely popular
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 06:10
|
|
|
Pakled posted:Go check out Hillaryis44. They support Trump now. Whoa, how the hell did this happen?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 06:18
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I don't have nearly as much faith in the debates as you guys seem to. I think Hillary will be well-read and competent, but I don't think Trump will burn out and I don't think the moderators will have the spine necessary to stand up to him. The media will take the opportunity to push the horse race narrative as hard as they possibly can, too. Trump is going to make silly faces, he's going to speak slowly and boring like he did with the president of Mexico, and he will considered presidential for it. People will tune out when Hillary speaks because she isn't Obama when it comes to speeches/debates, and overall it's going to be boring except for Trump clearing the extremely super low bar that's set for him.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 06:21
|
|
|
Ran Mad Dog posted:Whoa, how the hell did this happen? They were the original birthers if you recall. Trump is now the birther king.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 06:32
|
|
|
BetterToRuleInHell posted:Trump is going to make silly faces, he's going to speak slowly and boring like he did with the president of Mexico, and he will considered presidential for it. People will tune out when Hillary speaks because she isn't Obama when it comes to speeches/debates, and overall it's going to be boring except for Trump clearing the extremely super low bar that's set for him. This will be much harder for him when he can't read prepared remarks from a TelePrompTer and then refuse to answer questions. He will probably try to do the "ignore question, give stock sound bite answer to entirely different question" strategy, but I question his ability to stay on message based on, well, his entire life up to this point.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 06:40
|
|
|
I expect the first debate will go semi-sanely and in the second one Trump will lose his temper. Alternately, he will just constantly interrupt Hillary, which will piss off white women. GG.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 06:43
|
|
|
Ran Mad Dog posted:Whoa, how the hell did this happen? Because their real objection to Obama wasn't his inexperience...
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 06:46
|
|
|
Axetrain posted:Speaking of Wallace, Bill Clinton taking him to task for his lovely interview questions is always a good watch. I wonder what Mike Wallace thought of his son. Raenir Salazar posted:Wow gently caress Wallace. Is he even remotely better now?  No, he is not better. Kilroy fucked around with this message at 06:57 on Sep 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 06:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 17:24 |
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I don't have nearly as much faith in the debates as you guys seem to. I think Hillary will be well-read and competent, but I don't think Trump will burn out and I don't think the moderators will have the spine necessary to stand up to him. The media will take the opportunity to push the horse race narrative as hard as they possibly can, too. Personally I can't see any way for Trump to improve his standing with white women. His numbers are so bad he's losing across virtually every single segment of the white women vote by large margins. The only single place he's ahead is his strongest group, folks without higher education, and even then he's like 1 point ahead. He is absolutely dismal with women as a whole of course, but even white women. The absolutely best bet I can see for Trump is just not making things worse for himself, which is a tall order. If he can walk away without acting like such an egregious sexist bully, to the woman across from him, that will probably leave him where he started, but thats the best case scenario I can see. Whats much more likely in my mind is Trump does Trump and further alienates women when he is debating one, one on one, by being dismissive, demeaning, and talking over her. Trump can talk his way around making men believe he's not a sexist shitbag, just like he's been talking his way around making whites think he's not racist (or at least giving an excuse they can tell themselves). Though much like the majority of minorities see right through his obvious bullshit on race, I think women clearly see what kind of massive pig he is, and has been for decades, which the polls show. I just don't see any scenario where Donald loving Trump, and all the horrible things he's said about women, or done to women, over the years will ever, ever be able to make up that slack.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 07:00
|
|
