|
Gripweed posted:I am having trouble understanding, at a conceptual level, how someone so opposed to fascism would support a system that allows fascists to peacefully take control of the government. You're just repeating me at this point and confirming what I said, and you don't even seem to realize you're doing it. I'll say it again: Something does not have to be my ideal in order to be worth supporting over another thing. Please, try, fundamentally, to understand this concept, since this conversation is just you saying over and over and over in different ways that you don't get that idea, to the point where you are countering it by describing how you don't get that idea as if that is somehow a counterpoint. Even beyond that - what system are even you proposing that doesn't allow fascists to take control of the government? I must have missed that. It's worth pointing out that "fascist takeover" isn't the only possible bad outcome, so my "ideal" system is one that at least involves a path to achieving as many good outcomes as possible, but I'm not even sure I can think of a system that doesn't allow for fascists taking over, only ones that make it more difficult. Gripweed posted:Ok, let's talk about this. What changes would you like to see? A return to parties picking the candidate would have prevented Trump from being the candidate in 2016, 2020, and 2024. That's three shots at fascism taken off the board. So would you support an end to party primaries? An end to presidential elections, going to a system where the Senate or something chooses the president probably would have eliminated the chance of Trump becoming president, would you support that? Every one of of these proposals is just "reduce the number of people that need to be convinced to support the fascist for him to take over", which might offer some additional resilience (I'm not entirely convinced) but is still fundamentally the system you just said you couldn't understand someone supporting... they still allow for a fascist takeover. So why, in your mind, within your rhetorical structure you've set up here, would I support them?\ Gripweed posted:No? I'm not talking a fascist take over, just a reduction in the level of direct citizen involvement in choosing politicians. Your proposal was literally to put the fascists in power solidly enough that the Democrats would be forced to "wander the woods for a while". So yes, you were talking about that. Gripweed posted:Oh, so it's based on the idea that Trump is a uniquely dangerous and unusual candidate. More dangerous than Bush, who did the dang Iraq War. And once he dies we'll be able to go back to normal, less important elections against sensible Republicans like DeSantis and Boebert. You're putting words in people's mouth and drawing weird conclusions. The argument wasn't that Trump was unique, it's that not everyone is Trump, even other bad people, which seems obviously true. And even if Trump was uniquely dangerous, that doesn't mean the others aren't dangerous or couldn't be more dangerous than Trump in other ways. GlyphGryph fucked around with this message at 16:21 on Dec 11, 2023 |
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 16:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 23:49 |
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:You're just repeating me at this point and confirming what I said, and you don't even seem to realize you're doing it. I'll say it again: Something does not have to be my ideal in order to be worth supporting over another thing. Please, try, fundamentally, to understand this concept, since this conversation is just you saying over and over and over in different ways that you don't get that idea, to the point where you are countering it by describing how you don't get that idea as if that is somehow a counterpoint. Because your position makes no sense. If every election is a referendum on fascism, that's not "not ideal" that's a loving nightmare. It's not even "not fascist" it's literally just the step before fascism. It turns all politics into nothing but a holding action against making that tiny little last step into fascism. If you don't have any other ideas, fine, but you should admit that. You should be able to admit that the system where every four years we either go fascist or not, forever, is not an acceptable system. Somebody needs to think of something new. Either that or you aren't that bothered about fascism. It has to be one or the other.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 16:34
|
|
|
Perfect, what should we do instead
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 16:40
|
|
|
Gripweed posted:Because your position makes no sense. If every election is a referendum on fascism, that's not "not ideal" that's a loving nightmare. It's not even "not fascist" it's literally just the step before fascism. It turns all politics into nothing but a holding action against making that tiny little last step into fascism. I think democracy is a good thing and we should strive for it. Reducing democracy makes it easier for a fascist to take and maintain control. If the majority of the population continues to vote to reduce democracy and embrace fascism forever, then that's the will of the people. If that occurs, hopefully there will be a future point where a reversion to more democracy is possible if there's massive regret among the populace. My name is Kalit, thank you for coming to my TED talk. Kalit fucked around with this message at 16:46 on Dec 11, 2023 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 16:43
|
|
|
If there is fascism, the conversion/reversion to democracy usually requires violence. Maybe having to veer between these different ways of running things is an unavoidable consequence of human nature, but Iwould really prefer just to stay in some order where government is directly accountable to its people without the need for guns or bloodshed.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 16:46
|
|
|
Misunderstood posted:Some extremely interesting stuff from the New York Times today that ties into the discussion of algorithmic pricing from last week. It talks about some of the ways companies have kept prices up and how some of those strategies might be starting to falter. This is the mechanism that could lead to the food deflation that some business leaders and economists are anticipating over the coming months. Interesting article. Here's the link, I think you missed it: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/11/business/economy/profit-margins-inflation.html
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 16:51
|
|
|
Gripweed posted:I'm not talking about the fascists taking over, just reducing the level of democracy in America. We live in a country where the Electoral College already ensures the person with the most votes doesn’t win elections, which is how the fascists took over last time. Before you go any further with this argument, would you mind showing us exactly how even less democracy than our current rather non-democratic system will also equal less fascism rather than just redistributing it out of the hands of the people (who are, again, consistently majority non-fascist) and into…what anti-fascist force, exactly?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 16:53
|
|
|
Misunderstood posted:e2: Oh, as we were talking about this yesterday. I wanted to pull out this quote. No amount of price fixing or collusion can stop people from saying "you know what, a soda is just too expensive, I'll have a lemonade instead". If they can raise the price without anyone saying that, then the soda was underpriced. That's the fundamental limit in raising prices on non-essential goods. No matter what kinds of excuses or tactics companies use to increase prices, they all come up against the intractable barrier of "people can just buy less of that thing, or even none of it". Gripweed posted:If they just ignored all the current discussion of people not voting for Biden because of the genocide, and all post election surveys and polling, sure, they could come to that conclusion. They would have to be intentionally disingenuous to do so but yeah I wouldn't put it past them. If post-election surveys and polling show that Biden's support for Israel's war in Gaza is a major reason why people aren't voting for him, then they could come to that conclusion. But for the most part, pre-election polling isn't showing that. It's showing that people are mad about crime, immigration, and the economy. Gripweed posted:Because your position makes no sense. If every election is a referendum on fascism, that's not "not ideal" that's a loving nightmare. It's not even "not fascist" it's literally just the step before fascism. It turns all politics into nothing but a holding action against making that tiny little last step into fascism. The "something new" is to convince Americans to stop loving fascism. The system is window dressing over the fact that a substantial portion of the American populace wants fascism. Changing the system is just shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 16:56
|
|
|
Gripweed posted:Because your position makes no sense. It makes perfect sense if you understand that "Something does not have to be my ideal in order to be worth supporting over another thing", which, again, you do not. You also don't seem to understand the meaning of the words you are using, based on the rest of this post, it makes more sense if you use words correctly. quote:If every election is a referendum on fascism, that's not "not ideal" that's a loving nightmare. Do you not understand what "not ideal" means? Nightmares are practically by definition not ideal. Also, we are not in a situation where every election is a referendum on fascism. We have too many elections right now where that is unfortunately the case, but it's not all of them by any means. Letting the fascists win in those elections, as you propose, would not somehow make things less nightmarish, it would make them moreso. quote:It's not even "not fascist" it's literally just the step before fascism. The step before fascism is by definition not fascism. That's what makes it the step before fascism. Otherwise it would be fascism. quote:It turns all politics into nothing but a holding action against making that tiny little last step into fascism. How does it do that? Because that's not the situation we are in right now. There are many other kinds of politics happening at every moment. Even if fascism wins, there would still be non-fascist politics happening, just in an even less ideal structure and system and environment. Also, the step clearly isn't as tiny as you believe, or as singular, since in 2016 we lost the election, and it still wasn't sufficient to push us over the edge, only much closer. quote:If you don't have any other ideas, fine, but you should admit that. You should be able to admit that the system where every four years we either go fascist or not, forever, is not an acceptable system. Somebody needs to think of something new. Either that or you aren't that bothered about fascism. It has to be one or the other. I do have other ideas, as I've already mentioned. I have worked to get some of those ideas implemented, and tried to argue and build public support for some of the others. Turning ideas into reality is long, hard, fraught work with no guarantee of success. Making any of those ideas reality requires us, in the meantime, to continue "not going fascist". That's a really important fundamental component of all of them. A system where we decide every four years whether or not to go fascist is more acceptable than one where we have gone fascist. Why don't you seem to understand this? Defeating fascism is not my only goal, but it is a goal and most of my other goals rely on it. Why don't you seem to understand that either? I'm not even sure what you think my position is, but I get the feeling at this point it's not remotely similar to the position I actually hold, even though I have said what my position is over and over again. Now, please, answer my questions: What fascism-proof system are you proposing as the alternative i should be supporting instead, and how does letting the fascists take over our current system (your existing proposal) get us to that system? How does not voting for Joe Biden for President make that system happen? Why should I believe pursuing that system is more likely to succeed than alternative approaches such as "convincing people fascism is bad actually and they shouldn't vote for it" when that is still a possibility? GlyphGryph fucked around with this message at 17:15 on Dec 11, 2023 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 17:02
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:The "something new" is to convince Americans to stop loving fascism. The system is window dressing over the fact that a substantial portion of the American populace wants fascism. Changing the system is just shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic. This is the root of it. A class good analysis will reach this conclusion.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 17:04
|
|
|
Gripweed posted:If you believe that Donald Trump is a fascist who will kill millions of Americans and dismantle democracy, why do you think that last part is a bad thing? Why are you committed to a system of government that gives Donald Trump a very good shot at enacting fascism in America every four years? Shouldn't' you be opposed to that system? Why do you think preserving democracy is a good goal when all democracy does is put America at risk of fascism? quote:If you don't have any other ideas, fine, but you should admit that. You should be able to admit that the system where every four years we either go fascist or not, forever, is not an acceptable system. Somebody needs to think of something new. Either that or you aren't that bothered about fascism. It has to be one or the other. So I'm hearing you out here at the razor's edge of how I'm even supposed to take this at face value as a good faith argument. Apparently, democracy only does one thing: equip fascism. Only that one thing. Literally as you say, "all democracy does is put America at risk of fascism" ... It satisfies no other purpose, it is not associable with any kind of improvement in material conditions, freedoms, quality of life, stability, or human rights. The answer, therefore, if we are to accept your logic, is clear: to defeat fascism, we must defeat democracy!
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 17:06
|
|
|
I believe in liberal democracy. Politics is never solved, you are always going to have to participate in some way. Even if all your ideological allies sweep every office, you're still going to have to work to keep them there. Every election is the most important election of your life. This is true even in lower stakes, much more so when you have a candidate on the other side like Trump, who is committed to authoritarianism. zoux fucked around with this message at 17:09 on Dec 11, 2023 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 17:06
|
|
|
Gripweed posted:Because your position makes no sense. If every election is a referendum on fascism, that's not "not ideal" that's a loving nightmare. It's not even "not fascist" it's literally just the step before fascism. It turns all politics into nothing but a holding action against making that tiny little last step into fascism. What you're saying sounds like the only way to not turn fascist is to be fascist already, which is an incredibly bad take if you actually don't like fascism. Ultimately, if people are to have a say in government, there will be a risk that people want fascism. The only alternative is to make people who like fascists not able to vote, and any effort at disenfranchisement is ultimately saying fascism but for the guy I like. There is no perfect system for you specifically unless everybody else wants the things you want.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 17:12
|
|
|
The Associated Press has an interesting article about the reasons that personal/overall impressions of the economy have diverged for the first time in history. They essentially come to the same conclusion as everyone else: There's lots of things it could be and probably isn't any one specific thing, but nobody can really prove anything for sure.  Even though the overall conclusion is kind of uninteresting, they do talk to a lot of economists, average people, political figures, and data scientists who break down each and every potential reason in a clear and detailed way. https://twitter.com/AP/status/1734241880848621817 quote:WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden goes into next year’s election with a vexing challenge: Just as the U.S. economy is getting stronger, people are still feeling horrible about it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 17:19
|
|
|
mawarannahr posted:Interesting article. Here's the link, I think you missed it: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/11/business/economy/profit-margins-inflation.html
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 17:29
|
|
|
price deflation is usually chained directly to extremely weird, troubling financial situations, but it's weird and troubling enough now that i'm ambivalent about any way it could supposedly be worse than to have cost of living concerns finally start going down. Everything's sticker shock these days, you go on one bowling lanes outing with the kids, and maybe get some pizza and icecream. Oh oops that was 200 bucks. Lets take everyone to the movies! Oh no, 275 bucks. Gotta get groceries. Oof, 6.023 X 1023 bucks
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 17:33
|
|
|
Kavros posted:Gotta get groceries. Oof, 6.023 X 1023 bucks Try going to Trader Joe's instead of Trader Avogadro's
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 17:39
|
|
|
Avogadro toast? In THIS economy?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 17:42
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:I don't think Bush promise to exterminate the vermin an purge the marxists and communists on day 1. Crime dropped for 20 years straight and people were by and large sure the opposite is happening, so it's really an old hit returning to the charts.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 17:43
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:I don't think Bush promise to exterminate the vermin an purge the marxists and communists on day 1. To be fair, according to his own data, crime experienced a large drop in 2023 but it was still higher than the average for the last 25 years because it was coming off of the huge surge in 2020 through 2022. So the question of "Is crime higher than it used to be?" is technically "Yes," if people are thinking "used to be" means "pre-2020."
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 17:49
|
|
|
WaPo WH Correspondent Jeff Stein is noticing some trends: https://twitter.com/JStein_WaPo/status/1734251924243837124 Interesting article in NYT about the rise in pedestrian fatalities. It argues that larger helltrucks aren't actually behind most of the increase quote:Beyond just display screens, new vehicles have also changed to be wider, longer, taller and heavier. Not only do heavier vehicles hit pedestrians with more force, but they also often have worse brake times, meaning a driver who notices a pedestrian at the last second may strike that person at higher speeds. Studies have also indicated that vehicles with taller hoods are more likely to kill if they hit pedestrians; they strike people closer to the head or torso, instead of the legs. They blame: darkness, people using their cellphones, and rising populations in southern states. One interesting thing they argue is that as fewer vehicles in the US have manual transmissions, it gives more people more time to gently caress around with their phones and other distractions rather than on shifting. Well, the sun always sets every day, so why the increase?  Again, American only phenomenon. 3 in 4 American pedestrian deaths happen at night, in comparable countries, they say more pedestrians die during the day.  But sure enough, right around sunset, you see a spike in pedestrian deaths. The article doesn't reach any conclusions, really, so it's up to the reader as to how compelling they find the various arguments. Seems to me like it's a confluence of all these things. quote:Individually, any of these theories seems unsatisfying. But put together, it’s clear that there’s been a particularly American mix of technological and social changes over the past decade and a half. And they have all come on top of a road system and an ingrained culture that prioritizes speed over safety. Whatever has happened over this time has reversed years of progress on daytime pedestrian fatalities, too, leading to a modest increase in deaths. Nighttime, however, has the potential to amplify so many of these new risks. zoux fucked around with this message at 18:22 on Dec 11, 2023 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 18:03
|
|
|
Misunderstood posted:That has often not been the choice. Mitt Romney is not a fascist. Bob Dole was not a fascist. You could argue George W. Bush was a fascist, but it would be a stretch, and in any case he certainly never campaigned as one. To apply the dichotomy of "one candidate is always fascist!" to the past and to carry it forward into the future are both extreme forms of recency bias. I was only in 6th grade during Dole's run, but claiming Romney and Dubya weren't fascist is some revisionist poo poo right there. Dubya was constantly being called Hitler 2.0 and a wannabe dictator and the worst thing since unsliced bread. And Romney, maybe throwing around the F word wasn't as in vogue with him, but he was still on the hook for all the same beats as Republicans nowadays. "He wants to institute theocratic rule" , he wants to revoke women's rights, he wants to put LGBT people into camps and fund conversion therapy. He was in favor of all the same poo poo that Trumpists are wanting now. The only notable difference is between Romney/Dubya and Trump is that the formers didn't make uncouth tweets like the latter does, but there was absolutely just as much  about how they were a direct threat to the very concept of freedom and were going to outlaw apple pie and mandate all newborn babies be baptized.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 18:25
|
|
|
The previously unnamed single member of the House that was preventing the bipartisan UFO disclosure amendment from getting a vote was revealed to be House Intelligence Chairman Mike Turner. He refused to bring any bill funding the government out of committee with the original language included. As far as we know, he was the only one who was actively fighting the amendment. Some other Republicans likely would have voted against it, but none of them seemed to care enough to fight it except him. Most of the original amendment made it into the final bill, but they removed a provision that would have required that all UFO documents be presumed to be public and released immediately unless the military or White House objected. If they did object, they would automatically be unclassified in 25 years.  https://twitter.com/mkraju/status/1733933361800925559
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 18:35
|
|
|
Bodyholes posted:My girlfriend is trans and we're trying to find another country because I do think Trump's reelection is imminent. All the signs are there. I'm not interested in "finding out", unlike the death cult thread. If it makes you feel any better, there's actually no good reason to think that Trump's election is "imminent," assured, or even likely. In fact, all the signs that are actually predictive of an election win (not polls one year out, which only start to get mildly predictive at the 200-day mark) point to Biden winning. This is based on consistent Democratic overperformance in special elections and them turning the Red Wave into a trickle, as well as... well, Trump running and facing a thousand felony charges while doing so. The election season didn't even start yet. You'll have a loathed criminal who was recently found guilty of sexual abuse running against an old guy. Biden's approval numbers don't help, but that's only if the other guy is doing better in this comparison. As for Palestine, Republicans got smoked in November after a month of conflict there. I doubt this moves the needle too much.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 18:35
|
|
|
the_steve posted:I was only in 6th grade during Dole's run, but claiming Romney and Dubya weren't fascist is some revisionist poo poo right there. I was in college for W's first run and the race wasn't about how Bush was a fascist, it was about how there was so little difference between him and his opponent. I mean you've always had counterculture types that call everyone a fascist but mainstream discussion about if this guy or that guy is a literal fascist didn't start until Trump, as I recall it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 18:36
|
|
|
zoux posted:
I wonder if an aging population of drivers is contributing? I know as this dead comedy forum gets older, we have to recognize that our eyesight and reaction times aren't what they used to be.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 18:39
|
|
|
There have always been arguments that Republicans were fascist to some degree or other. Nobody ever thought either Bush would refuse to leave office if he lost the election, though. Nobody. It was inconceivable.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 18:40
|
|
|
the_steve posted:I was only in 6th grade during Dole's run, but claiming Romney and Dubya weren't fascist is some revisionist poo poo right there. George Bush isn't a fascist because he was elected using our democratic process.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 18:44
|
|
|
FLIPADELPHIA posted:The Bush from Bush v. Gore? Given the very distinct possibility that the 2004 and 2006 elections were also compromised by Republicans, I'm not so sure that Trump represents such a major break with honoring elections. The Bush camp made a slimy grab because a national election was a coin toss with a raw count that favored Republicans, and it worked because their side had the courts after controlling the Executive (in landslide elections) for most of the previous 30 years. Somehow this turned into a folk history where people will insist that SCOTUS was gonna crown Bush no matter how the election went, with pages of blow-by-blow and speculation that mysteriously always leaves out the "close initial count favoring Bush" that made it all possible. Usually because it's in service of an argument that hesitance or disunity on the left couldn't possibly be a contributing factor to the Bush presidency . I suspect there's probably a big correlation between those on the left who really internalized that omission and those who show such learned helplessness about opposing fascists today.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 18:45
|
|
|
the_steve posted:I was only in 6th grade during Dole's run, but claiming Romney and Dubya weren't fascist is some revisionist poo poo right there. I don't think you are remembering 2000 or 2012 correctly here. Nobody seriously believed that Mitt Romney was going to implement a Mormon theocracy if he was elected President - outside of some crazy evangelicals. The big hits against him were all about his tax plan, his work in private equity, and wanting to dismantle Obamacare and Medicare. The extreme version of the narrative against him wasn't that he was Hitler 2.0, it was that he was a robot corporate overlord who wanted to chop up and sell off the government like he did in private industry and wants to raise taxes on working people to pay for corporate tax cuts. 2000 was literally the opposite of Hitler 2.0. The whole narrative was that it was the most boring election ever and the result didn't matter because the two candidates were basically the same, the Soviet Union was defeated, the economy was doing its own thing, and the country was basically on autopilot.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 18:47
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:No amount of price fixing or collusion can stop people from saying "you know what, a soda is just too expensive, I'll have a lemonade instead". If they can raise the price without anyone saying that, then the soda was underpriced. In a truly free market things are priced based on supply and demand - in turning themselves into a duopoly, Pepsi and Coke have artificially restricted the supply side of that equation. It's not surprising to me that soda is inelastic, as somebody who has not really changed his usage of it as the price has increased (and to cite another classic inelastic good, I didn't too much with cigarettes either.) It's just that inelasticity doesn't have to mean a price set to the maximum somebody will pay if there is competition in the market. Misunderstood fucked around with this message at 18:52 on Dec 11, 2023 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 18:49
|
|
|
It looks like the Goons aren't the only ones confused about how bad things are. The Washington Post had two opinion pieces less than a week apart from each other that say things that are, frankly, mutually exclusive. A Trump dictatorship is increasingly inevitable. We should stop pretending. By Robert Kagan quote:Americans might take to the streets. In fact, it is likely that many people will engage in protests against the new regime, perhaps even before it has had a chance to prove itself deserving of them. But then what? Even in his first term, Trump and his advisers on more than one occasion discussed invoking the Insurrection Act. No less a defender of American democracy than George H.W. Bush invoked the act to deal with the Los Angeles riots in 1992. It is hard to imagine Trump not invoking it should “the Communists, Marxists, Fascists, and Radical Left Thugs” take to the streets. One suspects he will relish the opportunity. This directly contrasts with what the next opinion piece states. Enough with all the fatalism about a Trump dictatorship. By Greg Sargent quote:This might be easy to overlook amid Trump’s daily degradations, but the Trump years offer at least some cause for optimism. When Trump executed his 2017 ban on many Muslims entering the country, crowds descended on airports in a surprising outpouring of support. A year later, historians Lara Putnam and Theda Skocpol documented an unexpected groundswell of painstaking political organizing among formerly apathetic middle-aged women to defend democracy, fueling Democrats’ 2018 midterm blowout. The subject matter is too serious for me to see this as funny, but it's definitely interesting to read these two articles side-by-side. Opinion pieces are wild, y'all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 18:50
|
|
|
Misunderstood posted:Yes and no... Coke and Pepsi are able to price their products as they do because they don't compete with each other on price and their competitors, for whatever reason, make absolute garbage. This is slander against the Pepper Nation and the Doctor will not stand for it https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/28/business/dr-pepper-history/index.html
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 18:52
|
|
|
e: double post
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 18:52
|
|
|
Inglonias posted:It looks like the Goons aren't the only ones confused about how bad things are. The Washington Post had two opinion pieces less than a week apart from each other that say things that are, frankly, mutually exclusive. Hieronymous Alloy posted:This is slander against the Pepper Nation and the Doctor will not stand for it
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 18:53
|
|
|
Inglonias posted:It looks like the Goons aren't the only ones confused about how bad things are. The Washington Post had two opinion pieces less than a week apart from each other that say things that are, frankly, mutually exclusive. People with different opinions are published in Op-Ed sections all the time. An Op-Ed isn't an endorsement of the argument, so the WaPo isn't "arguing" two different things. Both articles also basically argue the same thing if you read through them. They both say that Trump will try undemocratic or autocratic things if he gets a second term. One of them just thinks that people will go along with it and the other says that people can resist it to prevent some of his goals. They aren't really contradictory.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 18:55
|
|
|
if i have my dumbshit pundits right, robert kagan wrote articles at The Weekly Standard screeching about how saddam's WMD threat to the US was increasingly inevitable. right around the corner. that we had to stop denying the reality of it
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 19:01
|
|
|
Kagan is dumb even by neocon standards.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 19:05
|
|
|
Inglonias posted:It looks like the Goons aren't the only ones confused about how bad things are. The Washington Post had two opinion pieces less than a week apart from each other that say things that are, frankly, mutually exclusive. “Look, fascists ain’t so bad really, ‘cause sometimes some people try to fight ‘em for a while if total power ain’t consolidated immediately.”
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 19:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 23:49 |
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:The Associated Press has an interesting article about the reasons that personal/overall impressions of the economy have diverged for the first time in history. You may also look at 2006 for the opposite/inverse phenomenon... voter opinion about the economy was still very high, but there were a lot of extremely troubling indicators, and the incumbent party got absolutely wrecked. The economy was not part of the narrative of why the 2006 blue wave happened, but maybe, in aggregate, people sensed the rot. And both public sentiment and underlying conditions were significantly worse a year ago than they are now (and I think it's reasonable to expect that trend to continue, barring any outside shocks.) zoux posted:WaPo WH Correspondent Jeff Stein is noticing some trends: Kavros posted:Avogadro toast? Misunderstood fucked around with this message at 19:29 on Dec 11, 2023 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2023 19:23
|
|