|
Professor Beetus posted:Yeah the dumbest poo poo I see on Twitter is notable libs pointing out GOP hypocrisy and going "a ha!" Like holy poo poo they don't care, and they haven't cared in years. They lie out both sides of their mouth and their base doesn't give a poo poo either. The hypocrisy is often quite funny, I just don't think it really has any political utility. The audience is not the diehards, the diehards don't care and never believed it anyway. The point is the more you force them into more and more insane positions the low-info people who aren't on Twitter start to smell the bullshit that their face is being rubbed in. It's not some "we got him" moment, it's shaving fractions of percentage points off of soft support and primes people to be more receptive to poo poo like the FBI saying he broke the law.
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 16:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 13:09 |
|
|
evilweasel posted:if prosecutors are motivated and have targeted you, then saying things without really understanding the issues involved runs the risk of you saying something that sounds like (but is not) either a lie or an admission of something. the assumption is someone who committed a crime will deny it; so will someone who didn't do it; denying it does nothing to help you. if you have knowledge that can help prove you didn't do it, your lawyer can help use your knowledge to find the independent objective evidence that can prove your innocence. and the police may be motivated to find a crime you committed because they think you're a bad person, so you may wind up incriminating yourself in a crime nobody would ever charge you with in other circumstances. The only strange part of this is that it's Trump doing it, when has he ever thought that immediately blabbing nonsense to everyone in earshot wasn't the best course of action? Then again despite all else his self-preservation instincts are usually on-point. Still Trump correctly recognizing that he can't keep his loving mouth shut and will openly admit crimes to anyone who'll listen is odd for him.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 16:58
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:The audience is not the diehards, the diehards don't care and never believed it anyway. I have a hard time believing this will have any effect except driving the right further right: “oh, this guy says he is against abortion but his wife had one? Well we just need to get someone even more conservative” which so far hasn’t consistently hosed over the GOP—they certainly haven’t moderated and they certainly aren’t waning in power.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 17:03
|
|
|
IPlayVideoGames posted:There’s no way he’s going to be able to keep this up for long. He has to be a pressure cooker just building up more and more until he inevitably posts something on Truth about how the real mycrimes.txt was in the upstairs bookshelf. It'll be like the ending of A Few Good Men, except that the angry speech will happen when they ask Trump to state his name for the record.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 17:05
|
|
|
selec posted:I have a hard time believing this will have any effect except driving the right further right: “oh, this guy says he is against abortion but his wife had one? Well we just need to get someone even more conservative” which so far hasn’t consistently hosed over the GOP—they certainly haven’t moderated and they certainly aren’t waning in power. Under what definition aren't the GOP waning in power? In the last two elections they've lost control of the Senate, house, and presidency. I'm not sure how it doesn't have an effect when the two leading stories right now are "Trump claims FBI planned evidence" and "Trump pleads the fifth".
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 17:08
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:The audience is not the diehards, the diehards don't care and never believed it anyway. selec posted:I have a hard time believing this will have any effect except driving the right further right: “oh, this guy says he is against abortion but his wife had one? Well we just need to get someone even more conservative” which so far hasn’t consistently hosed over the GOP—they certainly haven’t moderated and they certainly aren’t waning in power. I don't think this stuff drives the right further right, but I also don't see much evidence that it does anything to budge low info voters. I mean the right wing does it too, they just look extremely stupid i.e. "hmm Bernie Sanders wants poor people not to starve and be homeless, but he himself wears a jacket in cold weather" Afaict it's purely cheerleading for the various bases.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 17:11
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:Under what definition aren't the GOP waning in power? In the last two elections they've lost control of the Senate, house, and presidency. It is sort of a "Demographics is destiny" explanation, but Republicans are structurally increasing in power because non-college white voters are much more electorally efficiently distributed throughout the country than Democratic base voters. Assuming those demographics trends hold, places like Wyoming are going to become even more relatively politically powerful compared to places like California because of the structure of the electoral college and the Senate.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 17:12
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:It is sort of a "Demographics is destiny" explanation, but Republicans are structurally increasing in power because non-college white voters are much more electorally efficiently distributed throughout the country than Democratic base voters. Assuming those demographics trends hold, places like Wyoming are going to become even more relatively politically powerful compared to places like California because of the structure of the electoral college and the Senate. That's a rather esoteric argument about potential future power, which I find less convincing than the directly observable reality that is they literally have lost power in every election since 2016.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 17:16
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:The audience is not the diehards, the diehards don't care and never believed it anyway. This is a tactic that right-wing media absolutely loves and has used constantly for decades by the way. Pointing out every seeming bit of hypocrisy and double-think in the left (or among disloyal conservatives), no matter how spurious it may seem. It's not just there to energize the base. It's certainly not there to convince their enemies. It's there to make their enemies look bad in the eyes of of people who aren't full-time political junkies already settled permanently into their loyalties. Make the other guy "that joker" even among people who aren't big fans of your guy either. It's one of several tactics that has been fantastically successful in hurting the popularity of any remotely left-wing figures or policies.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 17:17
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:Nah. It'll be much the same as it is now. 45% of the country or whatever will be like "good. I wouldn't talk to those Deep State commies either something something Hunter Biden and Hillary and Soros". The rest of the country will continue to see it for what it is and know Trumps is and was a criminal but the needle won't move I don't think. i disagree because i think there's people who will take pleading the 5th as an admission it's not going to like drop his support to 30% but every little bit helps - even if it doesn't change a vote it may change enthusiasm
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 17:19
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:That's a rather esoteric argument about potential future power, which I find less convincing than the directly observable reality that is they literally have lost power in every election since 2016. The distribution of the EC and Senate is already a thing, though. It's why winning the EC, but losing the popular vote had only happened once in history, but it happened to two Republicans in 4 elections. And the Senate is already heavily over-represented by Republican-leaning states. It's going to continue to get worse, but it already exists.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 17:22
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:That's a rather esoteric argument about potential future power, which I find less convincing than the directly observable reality that is they literally have lost power in every election since 2016.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 17:24
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:The distribution of the EC and Senate is already a thing, though. It's why winning the EC, but losing the popular vote had only happened once in history, but it happened to two Republicans in 4 elections. So does the Democrat's own demographics advantage. Noting a specific electoral advantage in isolation is not the same thing as actually gaining power.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 17:29
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:i disagree because i think there's people who will take pleading the 5th as an admission There's something else that people are overlooking, is that pleading the 5th makes Donald look weak. I can easily see MTG or Gaetz running in 2024 (I don't know if they legally can, I just mean hypothetically) and hounding him on that. "Hey Donny boy, I thought you said only the guilty pled the 5th. What are you hiding?" They're loyal to Trump as of a few days ago, but there's a lot of blood in the water now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 17:29
|
|
|
Jethro posted:Which came after the Democrats lost power in every election between 2010 and 2016. So either we're witnessing the end of a 40 year old trend of increasing right wing power, or we're in the existing cycle of the president's party losing power after his first election overlaid on the afore-mentioned increase in right wing power. I'd prefer the former, but I suspect the latter. Doesn't explain the presidency which historically trends towards the incumbent in the latter scenario.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 17:31
|
|
|
Randalor posted:There's something else that people are overlooking, is that pleading the 5th makes Donald look weak. I can easily see MTG or Gaetz running in 2024 (I don't know if they legally can, I just mean hypothetically) and hounding him on that. "Hey Donny boy, I thought you said only the guilty pled the 5th. What are you hiding?" They're loyal to Trump as of a few days ago, but there's a lot of blood in the water now. Eh it's pretty easy to spin as some 5D chess plan to outsmart the deep-state. Republicans do not care about hypocrisy so Trump's past statements on the 5th might as well not exist.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 17:33
|
|
|
A lot of what is being said is premised on the already thin concept of representational democracy in America not finally being taken out to the wood shed and Old Yeller'd. If you have that level of faith in the Republican party going forward from today, well, bless you for it but I don't share it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 17:33
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:avoiding/reducing climate change is the goal if that is the goal it falls so short that suggesting that was the goal it is supposed to be measured against is an outright insult to the intelligence of the person supposedly sharing this goal, op
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 17:35
|
|
|
Randalor posted:"Hey Donny boy, I thought you said only the guilty pled the 5th. What are you hiding?" This would work out exactly as well as calling him out for his bankruptcies. Trump's whole persona is that of a shameless exploiter of every loophole and bureaucratic opportunity, and he has never been accused of hypocrisy in a way that mattered to his base.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 17:35
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:That's a rather esoteric argument about potential future power, which I find less convincing than the directly observable reality that is they literally have lost power in every election since 2016. They're also gaining a ton of ground with Hispanic voters and, near as I can tell, don't seem to be suffering a ton of loss in power and influence in government nor in political discourse and framing, let alone regarding legislation. Certainly not to the extent that a party with that crazy of a platform and with the opinions they openly espouse should expect in any type of society that I view as healthy or feel comfortable living in. They've absolutely jammed the courts as well (including SCOTUS), are passing very harsh voter restriction laws all over the country, are loving with teachers and I obviously don't need to remind you that Roe was overturned. They have plenty of power now when they should be a loving laughing stock. Yinlock posted:Eh it's pretty easy to spin as some 5D chess plan to outsmart the deep-state. Republicans do not care about hypocrisy so Trump's past statements on the 5th might as well not exist. Fake News! - Republicans. The end
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 17:43
|
|
|
i've been a politically aware adult for only a fairly short period of time and I've still been assured of a particular party having a 1000 year political regime all set up only for said party to then eat loving poo poo like 4 times.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 17:47
|
|
|
Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:if that is the goal it falls so short that suggesting that was the goal it is supposed to be measured against is an outright insult to the intelligence of the person supposedly sharing this goal, op there are many people who are blithely asserting that; unfortunately the facts do not bear out that conclusion (which is why those facts are being widely ignored by the "do nothing" camp in favor of such blithe assertions). that is, however, a much better argument (as grievously flawed as it is given that the facts falsify it) against the bill compared to "well its not giving me a car"
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 18:09
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:there are many people who are blithely asserting that; unfortunately the facts do not bear out that conclusion (which is why those facts are being widely ignored by the "do nothing" camp in favor of such blithe assertions). that is, however, a much better argument (as grievously flawed as it is given that the facts falsify it) against the bill compared to "well its not giving me a car" The argument also assumes that the bill exists in a vacuum, where it is completely cut off from any political pressure or momentum it might encourage for the climate movement. Climate orgs are loving ecstatic that something, anything, was passed - even knowing how insufficient it is - because they are going to use it to put more pressure on politicians and use it to wake up more voters. The Exec Director of The Environmental Voter Project was just on The Climate Pod talking about this. The bill is Good, even if it sucks poo poo. skylined! fucked around with this message at 18:23 on Aug 10, 2022 |
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 18:12
|
|
|
BIG FLUFFY DOG posted:i've been a politically aware adult for only a fairly short period of time and I've still been assured of a particular party having a 1000 year political regime all set up only for said party to then eat loving poo poo like 4 times. Political press and PR misrepresents things to the public, you say
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 18:26
|
|
|
Trump taking the 5th is certainly embarrassing given his own prior statements on it. But in the context of a civil lawsuit regarding accounting irregularities at the Trump Organization, I don't think it's going to be politically consequential unless they find a major bribery scandal or something. Nobody who's still voting for Trump is going to flip their vote over a bit of tax fraud or embezzlement.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 18:28
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:there are many people who are blithely asserting that; unfortunately the facts do not bear out that conclusion (which is why those facts are being widely ignored by the "do nothing" camp in favor of such blithe assertions). that is, however, a much better argument (as grievously flawed as it is given that the facts falsify it) against the bill compared to "well its not giving me a car" the facts are that even in the most optimistic projections this initiative produces a negligible to outright imperceptible impact on global warming if in addition to this non-assistance, it does not give anyone a car, the list of things making the initiative praiseworthy rapidly shrinks to 'makes a few people feel good.' for some people that is enough! fortunately/unfortunately, they are a tiny and extremely embarrassing minority.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 18:29
|
|
|
skylined! posted:The bill is Good, even if it sucks poo poo. Thread title candidate right here
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 18:32
|
|
|
Hypocrisy is a feature not a bug for political parties and propaganda. The only purpose to pointing out hypocrisy is to sway the general public who aren’t diehards. The issue is that this tactic has been used so often that the public simply shrugs and says “both sides do it”. The Republicans are doing the right thing and embracing the hypocrisy because it’s gotten them results. Dems are, as typical, loving around in decorum poisoning and have lost major battles while celebrating the weakest victories. The end goal should be the meaningful results. Everything else is just jerking around. It’s how Republicans won the Supreme Court (and soon the entire country).
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 18:45
|
|
|
Gort posted:What are these, out of interest? Others have covered it, but I’d add that anything you say to the police will ONLY be used against you in a court of law. You have NOTHING to gain and everything to lose from talking to the police.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 18:47
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:That and you still have to have lithium for the batteries as well as actually generating the electricity for the cars in the first place. I think that serious talk about and widespread, aggressive investment in nuclear would be a much bigger step in the right direction than this. I mean, I'll take it but, like you, I doubt its overall effectiveness. The rubber from tires still ends up in the atmosphere as carbon too
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 18:51
|
|
|
skylined! posted:The argument also assumes that the bill exists in a vacuum, where it is completely cut off from any political pressure or momentum it might encourage for the climate movement. Insufficient policies reduce support for larger ones. I'm not really sure how people can believe otherwise, just listen to the rhetoric Manchin et al will use the next time action on climate is proposed. It'll absolutely be "we already did a dramatic and vastly successful action, we need to focus on other things". You'd have to believe that that message is ineffective or would be drowned out by overwhelming and continuous calls for action coming from other sources in order to believe that this bill passing is some sort of momentum builder; that doesn't feel realistic to me but I suppose that's where subjective opinion kicks in. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-019-0491-z quote:This work by Hagmann and colleagues contributes to both our theoretical understanding of negative policy support spillover — why inducing support for one climate policy may reduce support for other policies — while also wrestling with how people respond when exposed to multiple policy strategies in succession. Across six studies, three of them with pre-registered hypotheses and materials, participants were asked to decide whether or not to implement a carbon tax policy or a green nudge policy when exposed to one or both options, sequentially or simultaneously. They consistently find that introducing a nudge undermines support for a carbon tax, and that this effect holds regardless of political affiliation, climate change belief and perceptions of policy effectiveness. The study notes that if the action is presented as part of a more comprehensive policy the effect is reduced, but with all the incentives dems have to message this as a big game changer on its own I doubt things will land that way. And it doesn't help that popular media like the NYT carries articles with headlines directly implying that the dems "saved civilization" via this bill.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 18:52
|
|
|
Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:the facts are that even in the most optimistic projections this initiative produces a negligible to outright imperceptible impact on global warming The projections, period, state that it has a significant impact. https://repeatproject.org/ This has been discussed multiple times.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 19:00
|
|
|
navigation posted:Insufficient policies reduce support for larger ones. this is just not true politically. success builds on success: failure means nobody goes back to that well for a long time. the other issue is that even insufficient policies now mean that the policies needed next time are lower (had we done this level of work two decades ago it would have had a much bigger impact). if this is the most you could get done now you take that because the cost keeps getting higher and higher
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 19:10
|
|
|
virtualboyCOLOR posted:Hypocrisy is a feature not a bug for political parties and propaganda. The only purpose to pointing out hypocrisy is to sway the general public who aren’t diehards. The issue is that this tactic has been used so often that the public simply shrugs and says “both sides do it”. tbh if I genuinely believed that a politician would implement, say, M4A, I wouldn't give a dang how big of a hypocrite they were as long as they could do their best to deliver the goods. Hypocrisy just ain't worth caring about.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 19:10
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:this is just not true politically. success builds on success: failure means nobody goes back to that well for a long time. Do this for the ACA. You can make the argument that the failure of Hillary's plan in the 90's fits what you're saying, but it came back in a compromised form and has effectively killed any serious movement towards a real universal system. Arguably it's further empowered the insurance companies and as you can see by our ongoing healthcare system collapse, made things even worse.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 19:13
|
|
|
navigation posted:Insufficient policies reduce support for larger ones. I'm not really sure how people can believe otherwise, just listen to the rhetoric Manchin et al will use the next time action on climate is proposed. It'll absolutely be "we already did a dramatic and vastly successful action, we need to focus on other things". You'd have to believe that that message is ineffective or would be drowned out by overwhelming and continuous calls for action coming from other sources in order to believe that this bill passing is some sort of momentum builder; that doesn't feel realistic to me but I suppose that's where subjective opinion kicks in. So how does this square with Manchin winning his senate seat by literally shooting a hole (with a gun, in an ad) in Markey's cap and trade bill 12 years ago, and then being the deciding vote on the IRA this year? The ACA and increasing support for M4A? The incremental sniping of abortion access rights across the country and the elimination of Roe? The study you linked isn't really a useful representative argument, as it specifically links 'nudge' legislation to support for a carbon tax. Carbon taxes come with their own issues, and are debatably a pretty bad 'solution' to the climate problem. Most people don't understand them. It's a pretty esoteric piece of policy to base opinion research on. Jaxyon posted:Do this for the ACA. I'd argue that support for a public option, and awareness of the need to dramatically overhaul the healthcare system, is as high as its ever been and barring complete fascist catastrophe is on the horizon, likely in the form of a public option.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 19:18
|
|
|
You can also say that for the Carter-era push for Healthcare, where liberals tried to hold out for better. It all depends on circumstances and the current circumstance is we are unlikely to have a democratic trifecta again this decade. If we do, it'll partially because successful legislation was passed that energized liberals.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 19:19
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Do this for the ACA. i mean, you look at what got proposed each time from the initial failings back in the mid-1900s and it got narrower and narrower and narrower until the ACA finally got passed. if failure works, then one would expect it to have succeeded in spades given how often health care reform collapsed completely. instead what happened was the existing system got entrenched further and further. like health care reform is the ultimate counterexample to "failure is great, you get something better next time!" from the ACA there's a really clear building block path: 1) public option added 2) make public option clearly superior 3) existing insurance withers and dies the problem, of course, is getting a solid majority again
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 19:21
|
|
|
Srice posted:tbh if I genuinely believed that a politician would implement, say, M4A, I wouldn't give a dang how big of a hypocrite they were as long as they could do their best to deliver the goods. Of course, if the main tenet of your platform is "punish my enemies" then hypocrisy is much less of an issue. It in no way undercuts your platform. We all know petty vengeance is morally indefensible; people just enjoy it anyway. Evil is just easier than good, plain and simple.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 19:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 13:09 |
|
|
evilweasel posted:i mean, you look at what got proposed each time from the initial failings back in the mid-1900s and it got narrower and narrower and narrower until the ACA finally got passed. if failure works, then one would expect it to have succeeded in spades given how often health care reform collapsed completely. instead what happened was the existing system got entrenched further and further. The argument isn't "failure is great, you get something better next time", the argument is navigation posted:Insufficient policies reduce support for larger ones. It's arguable that the what got passed is as much as ever will be and that politicians are using it's passage as a way to avoid having to go further. Hence, quote:from the ACA there's a really clear building block path: being an obvious course but never actually happening. Obama is the one that killed the public option, not lack of a majority. You also have CA which could pass single payer but never does.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 19:26
|
|