RugbyRebels

I wonder if Biden's thread will generate over 7000 posts?

Sandydragon wrote:I wonder if Biden's thread will generate over 7000 posts?

Almost certainly not, although that's probably not a good thing considering how massively problematic both Biden and Harris are. They will get an absolute free pass on their history of credible accusations of sexual assault, writing and voting for bills promoting mass incarceration, supporting wars and torture for him and aggressively pursuing policies that criminalise the poor (jail punishments for parents of truants for example?!) and leading a department that fought against releasing non-violent prisoners who had reached the end of their minimum sentences because it would reduce the population of free prison-labour (or slavery, as it could be called) for her.

Still, at least they are not Trump.

Puja

Well, Trump called it, that after he loses the election they'd start rolling out the vaccines. I can't imagine it's actually true, but I'm pleased it's another thing for him to be angry about with that body of his putting such pressure on his heart

Puja wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:I wonder if Biden's thread will generate over 7000 posts?

Almost certainly not, although that's probably not a good thing considering how massively problematic both Biden and Harris are. They will get an absolute free pass on their history of credible accusations of sexual assault, writing and voting for bills promoting mass incarceration, supporting wars and torture for him and aggressively pursuing policies that criminalise the poor (jail punishments for parents of truants for example?!) and leading a department that fought against releasing non-violent prisoners who had reached the end of their minimum sentences because it would reduce the population of free prison-labour (or slavery, as it could be called) for her.

Still, at least they are not Trump.

Puja

AOC said some other very good things but again got labelled a dangerous socialist. She really isn't very politic, and she definitely doesn't frame her answers or solutions with relation to 90% of people, and she definitely doesn't think about the other policies that need to be in place to make her policies work in the real world...

But she does speak some sense.

I was listening to an economist arguing about the top rate of tax hike. That in the 20's, the top rate was 60% and they payed 1/3rd of the tax, then they reduced the top rate to just 24% and they payed 60% of the tax...

Which kinda misses the point somewhat, about the economic situations at the time, the growth and job availability, etc. But also introduces a point AOC and others like her have not addressed, which is tax avoidance. And, unlike this economist, I don't think the solution is to simply not raise the top rate but to remove the loopholes that allow them to pay less tax.

And I know the US is very different from the rest of the world as tax write-offs can mean rich people pay 5-10% tax, which is insane.

Oh, and on Biden, look: this is America. As far as American politicians go, this pair are not bad. They're moderates for America, they're liberals, they're nice people...

That they're nowhere close to what we would consider left of centre doesn't really matter: they're American and count as verging on socialist over there.

Baby steps.

OK, so we are all a lot happier that a nicer couple inhabit the top tier of American politics (or soon will) and the orange nutter will soon be forgotten about.

Except I don't think he will be.

Trumpism (for want of a better term) is a load of bollocks. But the reasons why it was popular enough to get 70m votes are still there. Not everyone voted for Trump out of tribal loyalty or because they were scared or reds under the bed. In the same way that some politicians celebrated the demise of communism in much of the world but gave no thought to the social-economic rationals for its existence in the first place, the same is true of Trump's America.

I hope the Democrats have a plan to address many of the issues that matter to these people, rather than just sign them off as gun nut racists (some undoubtedly are of course) but if Trump 2 is to be avoided then some sensible policies for economic and social renewal/improvement need to be found.

Sandydragon wrote:OK, so we are all a lot happier that a nicer couple inhabit the top tier of American politics (or soon will) and the orange nutter will soon be forgotten about.

Except I don't think he will be.

Trumpism (for want of a better term) is a load of bollocks. But the reasons why it was popular enough to get 70m votes are still there. Not everyone voted for Trump out of tribal loyalty or because they were scared or reds under the bed. In the same way that some politicians celebrated the demise of communism in much of the world but gave no thought to the social-economic rationals for its existence in the first place, the same is true of Trump's America.

I hope the Democrats have a plan to address many of the issues that matter to these people, rather than just sign them off as gun nut racists (some undoubtedly are of course) but if Trump 2 is to be avoided then some sensible policies for economic and social renewal/improvement need to be found.

We have a better term, it’s called fascism and it’s more than just Trump, it’s Orbán and Duda and Bolsonaro and Duterte and Erdogan and Modi and many more.

And until we do something about it, we’re disgracing ourselves.

A lot of those people don't want social renewal. Bear in mind the most consistent narrative coming out of the white house has been immigration. Wall, scary mooslims, Mexicans, shit hole countries, separating families, dawn raids on immigrant homes. The only other "achievement" has been a corporate tax cut, and Paul Ryan did that just before fucking off into the sunset. The socialism thing is just the malignant tumor on top of the dog shit flavoured anti-diversity sundae, just like your daddy used to have in the 50's when there was sensible segregated dining.

Stom wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:OK, so we are all a lot happier that a nicer couple inhabit the top tier of American politics (or soon will) and the orange nutter will soon be forgotten about.

Except I don't think he will be.

Trumpism (for want of a better term) is a load of bollocks. But the reasons why it was popular enough to get 70m votes are still there. Not everyone voted for Trump out of tribal loyalty or because they were scared or reds under the bed. In the same way that some politicians celebrated the demise of communism in much of the world but gave no thought to the social-economic rationals for its existence in the first place, the same is true of Trump's America.

I hope the Democrats have a plan to address many of the issues that matter to these people, rather than just sign them off as gun nut racists (some undoubtedly are of course) but if Trump 2 is to be avoided then some sensible policies for economic and social renewal/improvement need to be found.

We have a better term, it’s called fascism and it’s more than just Trump, it’s Orbán and Duda and Bolsonaro and Duterte and Erdogan and Modi and many more.

And until we do something about it, we’re disgracing ourselves.

I agree it’s unacceptable whether it’s this right wing populism or indeed fascism. Or communism for that matter. All extremist ideologies are unacceptable.

So, how to ensure that people are attracted to the centre of politics, or at least away from extremes? There are socio economic reasons why these fringe parties become popular. Find what the contributory factors are and concentrate on eradicating them.

SO the initial toy throwing exercise has resulted in the Secretary of Defence being sacked (announced via Twitter of course) and state prosecutors being authorised to investigate allegations of voter fraud.

Trumps main lawyer/arselicker Guilliani apparently has 50+ witnesses who will attest to voter fraud or other irregularities. Hopefully they are more credible than the Ukrainian businessman who has admitted that he lied in return for a green card promise.

Anyone got any comments on this?
https://www.thenational.scot/news/18860 ... ald-trump/

I can even repeat it with my imaging software!

Just seems needlessly incompetent by whoever put it together.

ETA; now I've verified for !yself (by simply zooming)
Actually, with a little thought, I'm more annoyed by the incompetence. For the last 6 months, we've know that he's going to have send one of 2 tweets, 1 to a personal friend, another to someone he knows personally hates him. But we couldn't even authorise 2 tweets to be written up and ready to fire... With 6 months notice...

Barr unleashes the hounds

Sandydragon wrote:SO the initial toy throwing exercise has resulted in the Secretary of Defence being sacked (announced via Twitter of course) and state prosecutors being authorised to investigate allegations of voter fraud.

Trumps main lawyer/arselicker Guilliani apparently has 50+ witnesses who will attest to voter fraud or other irregularities. Hopefully they are more credible than the Ukrainian businessman who has admitted that he lied in return for a green card promise.

Everything they've thrown at this so far has failed utterly when required to confirm details under oath.

And actually the leaks out of the Whitehouse are Trump has accepted the situation and is merely using time to set up his next move, seemingly a media one. Exactly what that move will be and how much normalcy/competency/decency we'll see yet as he transitions out isn't clear

Digby wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:SO the initial toy throwing exercise has resulted in the Secretary of Defence being sacked (announced via Twitter of course) and state prosecutors being authorised to investigate allegations of voter fraud.

Trumps main lawyer/arselicker Guilliani apparently has 50+ witnesses who will attest to voter fraud or other irregularities. Hopefully they are more credible than the Ukrainian businessman who has admitted that he lied in return for a green card promise.

Everything they've thrown at this so far has failed utterly when required to confirm details under oath.

And actually the leaks out of the Whitehouse are Trump has accepted the situation and is merely using time to set up his next move, seemingly a media one. Exactly what that move will be and how much normalcy/competency/decency we'll see yet as he transitions out isn't clear

I think its a bit of an automatic response from Trump. If pollen gets your nose you sneeze, if Trump doesnt get what he wants he sues.

Given that Biden is still looking good to win Georgia and Arkansas as well as the other states, even if an irregularity is proved in one particular count, the likelihood of it making a difference is mind bendingly small. I think some senior republicans are allowing Trump to have his last exercise of authority as a way to aid him out of the door in due course. Going to court costs them little and much of the blame can be laid at the door of Trump.

I suspect this is all about building up his base, building that image as a martyred president who the establishment stabbed in the back (so definitely not a loser) and preparing for his next commercial step.

You can be sure that he and his repugnant family are siphoning as much of the money raised for legal fees as they can. He is reportedly setting up a PAC to keep on the scene in the near future. More donated money to piss away. I imagine this is the only thing keeping some shameless pieces of shit around. His press secretary has to be seen to be believed. A rancid cunt of a human being with no redeeming ethic.

Just like when he used his charity as a slush fund.

He is now raising money for the legal challenges.

Only, the fine print says that 60% is used to retire campaign debt. A campaign he contributed personally diddly squat.

It is financially convenient for him to keep litigating: he can keep milking his supporters.

you'd love to see how he pissed away his campaign war chest such he now needs to retire debt

Digby wrote:you'd love to see how he pissed away his campaign war chest such he now needs to retire debt

I would imagine it's because any money he spent himself was counted as a loan to his campaign, which he's now repaying. Or, even better, I'm willing to bet that the campaign needs to repay the fees incurred by use of Trump properties, Trump employees, probably the Trump brand as well. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if his campaign needs to pay him an appearance fee for speaking at his rallies.

Puja

Sandydragon wrote:

Stom wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:OK, so we are all a lot happier that a nicer couple inhabit the top tier of American politics (or soon will) and the orange nutter will soon be forgotten about.

Except I don't think he will be.

Trumpism (for want of a better term) is a load of bollocks. But the reasons why it was popular enough to get 70m votes are still there. Not everyone voted for Trump out of tribal loyalty or because they were scared or reds under the bed. In the same way that some politicians celebrated the demise of communism in much of the world but gave no thought to the social-economic rationals for its existence in the first place, the same is true of Trump's America.

I hope the Democrats have a plan to address many of the issues that matter to these people, rather than just sign them off as gun nut racists (some undoubtedly are of course) but if Trump 2 is to be avoided then some sensible policies for economic and social renewal/improvement need to be found.

We have a better term, it’s called fascism and it’s more than just Trump, it’s Orbán and Duda and Bolsonaro and Duterte and Erdogan and Modi and many more.

And until we do something about it, we’re disgracing ourselves.

I agree it’s unacceptable whether it’s this right wing populism or indeed fascism. Or communism for that matter. All extremist ideologies are unacceptable.

So, how to ensure that people are attracted to the centre of politics, or at least away from extremes? There are socio economic reasons why these fringe parties become popular. Find what the contributory factors are and concentrate on eradicating them.

It's quite simple really. Class conflict is not only between capitalist and non-capitalist classes. There are classes within capitalism that seek to establish or maintain their power structures. What we saw in the Trumpist and Brexit popularist revolutions is simply the manifestation of a disempowered capitalist class trying to change the economic rules of the game to rules that favour it, just like the transnational capitalist class did from the 70s to 90s. Such classes do not only consist of those at the top who own capital, but also all those who benefit from that class and are dependent on it.

I quite like the following analysis back from 2000 that appeared in the Cambridge Review of International Affairs, that looks at the Transnational Capitalist Class.
https://www.globalpolicy.org/globalizat ... ation.html

In other news, apparently around half of this beautiful, democratic country I call home believes that there were watermarks on the ballots and Biden cheated...

I mean, wtf people. Jeez.

You know, I feel so alone here now? Over the past year, our friends have outed themselves as people I do not want to associate with, who cannot have a conversation about anything without turning it to libertarian bullshit, and now my wife is saying the same thing, and she's usually the best person in the world at ignoring people's negatives to focus on their positives.

Sigh.

No wonder people turn to the internet more and more.

Zhivago wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Stom wrote:
We have a better term, it’s called fascism and it’s more than just Trump, it’s Orbán and Duda and Bolsonaro and Duterte and Erdogan and Modi and many more.

And until we do something about it, we’re disgracing ourselves.

I agree it’s unacceptable whether it’s this right wing populism or indeed fascism. Or communism for that matter. All extremist ideologies are unacceptable.

So, how to ensure that people are attracted to the centre of politics, or at least away from extremes? There are socio economic reasons why these fringe parties become popular. Find what the contributory factors are and concentrate on eradicating them.

It's quite simple really. Class conflict is not only between capitalist and non-capitalist classes. There are classes within capitalism that seek to establish or maintain their power structures. What we saw in the Trumpist and Brexit popularist revolutions is simply the manifestation of a disempowered capitalist class trying to change the economic rules of the game to rules that favour it, just like the transnational capitalist class did from the 70s to 90s. Such classes do not only consist of those at the top who own capital, but also all those who benefit from that class and are dependent on it.

I quite like the following analysis back from 2000 that appeared in the Cambridge Review of International Affairs, that looks at the Transnational Capitalist Class.
https://www.globalpolicy.org/globalizat ... ation.html

Wait, what?

No, no, no. While I agree with the concept that class conflict is a thing, I definitely disagree with the idea it is the be all and end all. In fact, it's an incredibly shallow and 1 dimensional way of looking at the world that requires no nuance at all. You can just lump all the billionaires together, Bill Gates is the same as Carlos Slim, who's the same as Soros, who's the same as Sheldon fucking Adelson.

No, they're not.

In fact, if a traditional capitalist was alive today to see what is called capitalism, he'd be aghast. This is post-capitalism, neo-capitalism, or whatever you want to call it. And the people who vote for populists are not people who are supported by neo-capitalism, but people who are held back by it.

So, perhaps, it's not about class at all. Perhaps it's about a sense of identity, of self.

Sociologically, we've moved further and further away from a system where the individual can get to know themselves and toward a place where people do not understand their own urges, thoughts or feelings. That leaves them grasping at any means to identify themselves.

So identity politics becomes a thing.

I'm a liberal!
I'm a conservative!

People just attach themselves to whichever group better represents what thoughts they do have about themselves. And because they've never learnt to know and understand themselves, they gradually become more and more radicalised by it.

So much so they will follow the same people who want to take away everything they own, they will shout down and vote down any policy designed to help them, and they will destroy their own lives because it does not fit the image they have created.

Popularism is just a symptom of a wider disease: people do not know themselves and the education system fails to provide them with the tools to do so.

That's why we get Brexit and Trump, not fucking capitalism.

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:you'd love to see how he pissed away his campaign war chest such he now needs to retire debt

I would imagine it's because any money he spent himself was counted as a loan to his campaign, which he's now repaying. Or, even better, I'm willing to bet that the campaign needs to repay the fees incurred by use of Trump properties, Trump employees, probably the Trump brand as well. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if his campaign needs to pay him an appearance fee for speaking at his rallies.

Puja

Me neither.

Stom wrote:

Zhivago wrote:

Sandydragon wrote: I agree it’s unacceptable whether it’s this right wing populism or indeed fascism. Or communism for that matter. All extremist ideologies are unacceptable.

So, how to ensure that people are attracted to the centre of politics, or at least away from extremes? There are socio economic reasons why these fringe parties become popular. Find what the contributory factors are and concentrate on eradicating them.

It's quite simple really. Class conflict is not only between capitalist and non-capitalist classes. There are classes within capitalism that seek to establish or maintain their power structures. What we saw in the Trumpist and Brexit popularist revolutions is simply the manifestation of a disempowered capitalist class trying to change the economic rules of the game to rules that favour it, just like the transnational capitalist class did from the 70s to 90s. Such classes do not only consist of those at the top who own capital, but also all those who benefit from that class and are dependent on it.

I quite like the following analysis back from 2000 that appeared in the Cambridge Review of International Affairs, that looks at the Transnational Capitalist Class.
https://www.globalpolicy.org/globalizat ... ation.html

Wait, what?

No, no, no. While I agree with the concept that class conflict is a thing, I definitely disagree with the idea it is the be all and end all. In fact, it's an incredibly shallow and 1 dimensional way of looking at the world that requires no nuance at all. You can just lump all the billionaires together, Bill Gates is the same as Carlos Slim, who's the same as Soros, who's the same as Sheldon fucking Adelson.

No, they're not.

In fact, if a traditional capitalist was alive today to see what is called capitalism, he'd be aghast. This is post-capitalism, neo-capitalism, or whatever you want to call it. And the people who vote for populists are not people who are supported by neo-capitalism, but people who are held back by it.

So, perhaps, it's not about class at all. Perhaps it's about a sense of identity, of self.

Sociologically, we've moved further and further away from a system where the individual can get to know themselves and toward a place where people do not understand their own urges, thoughts or feelings. That leaves them grasping at any means to identify themselves.

So identity politics becomes a thing.

I'm a liberal!
I'm a conservative!

People just attach themselves to whichever group better represents what thoughts they do have about themselves. And because they've never learnt to know and understand themselves, they gradually become more and more radicalised by it.

So much so they will follow the same people who want to take away everything they own, they will shout down and vote down any policy designed to help them, and they will destroy their own lives because it does not fit the image they have created.

Popularism is just a symptom of a wider disease: people do not know themselves and the education system fails to provide them with the tools to do so.

That's why we get Brexit and Trump, not fucking capitalism.

I don't think that you can call the pro-Brexit leaders as disenfranchised capitalists either. In fact Brexit made a bit of a mockery of tradition lclass arguments in that traditional working class voted alongside posh boys to leave, uniting both the left and right of the political spectrum. And whilst there has been anti-EU propaganda for decades in most of the popular newspapers, neither was that decision a top down driven piece of propaganda. There was plenty of bottom up resentment, which was magnified and expanded by the last crash. Likewise, many who voted fro Trump we 'left behind' by globalisation and would have resorted to any politician who claimed to take them seriously. In the US that's Trump as the left doesnt exist at any national level; in the UK it was Corbyn and Farage.

Stom wrote: Wait, what?

No, no, no. While I agree with the concept that class conflict is a thing, I definitely disagree with the idea it is the be all and end all. In fact, it's an incredibly shallow and 1 dimensional way of looking at the world that requires no nuance at all. You can just lump all the billionaires together, Bill Gates is the same as Carlos Slim, who's the same as Soros, who's the same as Sheldon fucking Adelson.

No, they're not.

'be all and end' all is a misrepresentation of my point, and my point is also pretty much the opposite of 'lumping all the billionaires together'.

Stom wrote:In fact, if a traditional capitalist was alive today to see what is called capitalism, he'd be aghast. This is post-capitalism, neo-capitalism, or whatever you want to call it. And the people who vote for populists are not people who are supported by neo-capitalism, but people who are held back by it.

This is just too irrelevant and incoherent to find a point in it. Again arguing against something I never claimed. Try actually reading my post before replying.

Stom wrote: So, perhaps, it's not about class at all. Perhaps it's about a sense of identity, of self.

Sociologically, we've moved further and further away from a system where the individual can get to know themselves and toward a place where people do not understand their own urges, thoughts or feelings. That leaves them grasping at any means to identify themselves.

So identity politics becomes a thing.

I'm a liberal!
I'm a conservative!

People just attach themselves to whichever group better represents what thoughts they do have about themselves. And because they've never learnt to know and understand themselves, they gradually become more and more radicalised by it.

So much so they will follow the same people who want to take away everything they own, they will shout down and vote down any policy designed to help them, and they will destroy their own lives because it does not fit the image they have created.

Popularism is just a symptom of a wider disease: people do not know themselves and the education system fails to provide them with the tools to do so.

That's why we get Brexit and Trump, not fucking capitalism.

And now you're pushing your rant against identity politics. The only relevance it has is in the effect it has in creating false consciousness in people so that they identify with a class that they are not a part of.

Sandydragon wrote: I don't think that you can call the pro-Brexit leaders as disenfranchised capitalists either. In fact Brexit made a bit of a mockery of traditional class arguments in that traditional working class voted alongside posh boys to leave, uniting both the left and right of the political spectrum.

If you look at the backers of Brexit you will see that they are members of a class of capitalists who are relatively disempowered by the status quo (relative disadvantage matters a lot in a competitive market system of course). In the case of Brexit it is of course a slightly different class to those backing Trump, and therefore have different interests. Predominantly it is a mixture of those who have their investments in non-EU countries or would benefit from such trade (think importing dirt cheap goods from commonwealth countries etc) or they have domestic interests (think fishing rights holders and other domestic capitalists that would benefit).

Sandydragon wrote:And whilst there has been anti-EU propaganda for decades in most of the popular newspapers, neither was that decision a top down driven piece of propaganda. There was plenty of bottom up resentment, which was magnified and expanded by the last crash.

Capitalism is top down, and anything that seeks to change opinion or incite to action is propaganda. Effective propaganda is based on truth, hence the fact that is is not manufactured out of thin air. Therefore I absolutely agree that the actual resentment existed, and that's also my point. Those people were those who were losers from the transnational capitalist class' attainment and consolidation of power (economic and political) over the last few decades.

Sandydragon wrote: Likewise, many who voted fro Trump we 'left behind' by globalisation and would have resorted to any politician who claimed to take them seriously. In the US that's Trump as the left doesnt exist at any national level; in the UK it was Corbyn and Farage.

Yes, agree here, and it is in line with my point.