American Politics Discussion Thread

[Jowy]

deleted as requested

[mackoti]

With US splitting up I think it would lead to mass-immigration from red states to blue states, as it is the blue states that currently carry the red states economically. It would be quite a twist of fate to have the anti-immigration populace now be immigrants themselves. Then again, they were also immigrants themselves in the past when they moved to the USA, so I guess it's nothing new. Anyway that goes beside the point, I agree that capitalism needs to go in the long term, and under another societal organization a united world could just be the logical thing. Though you'd have to get pretty close to that point to achieve the changes in the first place.I

I supose this reasoning is explaining why so many  californians are moving to texas.

That is caused by the housing crisis. California is by far the biggest contributor to US economy.

So you didnt answered to my question are those people moving to texas to live better or worse? They must be prety stupid because you said all people should flock towards the blue states.

I was courious and made a little research and looks like there is quite the opposite thing happening in USA people living blue states for red states, this making even GOP to be concerned as this might turn those state purple (blue). I supose those people all are running away from prospeirity blue state is bringing to them.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/lifestyle/bl...tes-purple


I see now Cyneheard answer, so Jowy even those bright left state are doing things which make life imposible for people and those pesky red states know how to resolve those that people are migrating(moving to theyr states).

Like a side note , I know like 20 americans which came in Romania to help people. I learned many things from them.Once i made a prity big mistake and expected the worse from them, and theyr leader talk so nice, still telling me wasnt good the thing i done. They were so encouraging and helpfull . They work here with gipsies and other categories which usualy people desconsider and I can say I learn from them to not desconsider anyone and try to understand they have a harder life. One of them even sponsered my wife at university...And all of them are what you call right winger(conservative) so for me is hard to understand
how other people disconsider those people....And btw none of them is rich in the american way(prety well for romanian standards back then, i worked mostly with them 10-25 years ago).

[T-hawk]

The opposite would be madness. It's not gun control if there's no control over guns. Vaccines work best when enough people have them.

This is what I'm talking about. The leftists start by just assuming the leftist position is already true and don't even understand that no, there's a debate to be had. You just automatically assumed that gun control should be enacted by the state, you didn't even engage the debate of whether it should be. You automatically assumed that making vaccines work best warrants the forcible authority of the state. No, none of that is any kind of objective or fundamental truth -- that's all opinion.

The mad leftists (not all are mad; this is what characterizes the mad ones) don't even realize that their opinion is opinion, they just assume it should be forced on everyone. That an opinion needs to be forced on everyone to work does not create the authority to enforce that opinion.

The only thing "Leftists" (whatever they're supposed to be) are trying to "coerce" is extending and expanding the basic level of human dignity that should be provided to everyone, but isn't.

And same here, you are assuming that "human dignity" is already what you want to define that it is.

MY human dignity is to own a firearm to defend my property and loved ones.

MY human dignity is to hire who I want in my business and not be coerced into diversity quotas.

MY human dignity is to exist in public and buy groceries without undergoing invasive medical inquisition.

MY human dignity is to keep the money I worked for rather than it being confiscated in taxes by those who didn't make themselves productive.

All of this leftist shit violates MY human dignity.

(I'm advancing some of that for the sake of argument, to illustrate the right/conservative viewpoint that people are saying they don't understand. I don't actually want to own a firearm or discriminate in hiring.)

[Jowy]

Mackoti, the states have not actually split up, it was a hypothetical. Texas actually ranks pretty high, though most red states don't. Related to that is the urban vs rural voting results. Urban areas are the most productive and are what supports the US economy. They vote for the Democrats, while rural areas that take more than they contribute vote for Republicans. If you've watched election result broadcasts, you'll notice a red sea with some blue spots where cities stand. Republicans are supposedly the party that is against handouts, but it's them that need those handouts the most. Not to mention that Republicans are the hardest pushing for handouts and bailouts for companies and rich people (note, most democrats are just as bad, see Manchin and Sinema right now). The Republican way is socialism for the elites. Leftists, especially progressives like Sanders, actually care about improving the quality of life for those who have it the worst.

You should google more studies if you want to learn more about it. It is just a ridiculous idea that trans people put themselves through all the ridicule and prejudice just for.. what? Why do they do that if they don't actually feel like they are a man or a woman in the wrong body? As far as I'm aware, they just want to be happy and live their lives. They're not hurting anyone, which is an obvious but an important point. So why not just let them live their life?

T-Hawk, we had this talk before, you don't seem to get what a society is. We have all these rules in place so we can exist together peacefully, and you benefit from these rules every single second of your life. If you were allowed to abuse other people, other people would be allowed to abuse you. You don't seem to understand this. You think you should be allowed to be racist or spread disease, but don't even try to claim that you'd be okay if other people did that to you. What you advocate for is a class system where you are above the others.

[Bobchillingworth]

Oh boy, a rant about "human dignity" from the guy who wants to fuck children's cartoon characters.



The true irony though is that T-Hawk aspires to be a greater leech than however he imagines any number of Democrats and/or his own sister to be. He benefits from the stability and security of a strong, taxpayer-funded government and civil society, including public health measures, as well as numerous privileges conferred to him as a white man of at least some means. Gut that society the way he advocates, and he wouldn't last long at all in the resulting catastophe.

[Mr. Cairo]

...

MY human dignity is to hire who I want in my business and not be coerced into diversity quotas.

MY human dignity is to exist in public and buy groceries without undergoing invasive medical inquisition.

...

So you want businesses to have the right to discriminate against people for their skin colour or sexuality; but you don't want businesses to have the right to discriminate against you for your medical choices. Hilarious.

You know, everything you say may sound reasonable at first glance, but it's undercut by the fact that Republicans are actually campaigning on bathroom bills and abortion bans.

[Nicolae Carpathia]

Don't forget they're trying to ban teaching anything about racism.

[Nicolae Carpathia]

And they're not even really two parties, but rather two wings of the same business party, with different sets of cultural signaling to honk off their bases. A couple of months ago the based populist conservatives were all freaking out about private equity firms like Blackstone buying up all stock of housing and turning the proud American Middle Class into renter serfs. Well, suddenly a member of the fucking Carlyle group just won election in VA, selling themselves as the based populist. And their opponents couldn't attack him on that, because they too were investors in Carlyle.

The choice given to the American public is in how much absolute power to give to the Owner class. And how much the ruling class can revel in the cruelty and privation inflicted on the underclass, on sexual and racial minorities.

[The Black Sword]

Is the 2-party split not more to do with First Past the Post? In Ireland we had 2 parties for a long time, despite proportional representation, but that's because politics was dominated by which side of the civil war you(or your parents) were on. Right now we have 3 major parties and I expect their collective vote to diminish in the future.

I think most parties are willing to work negotiate with each other for a government too, even if their rhetoric says otherwise at times. FG and FF are in government now and the further away we get from associating Sinn Fein with the Troubles in NI the less defensible it will be to not negotiate with them. I think if two parties were the only viable government and they couldn't work together and went back to throw another election instead they'd most likely get punished for it because people are happy to move their votes around. So there's a strong incentive to work together, even they don't like each other.

[Cyneheard]

Is the 2-party split not more to do with First Past the Post? In Ireland we had 2 parties for a long time, despite proportional representation, but that's because politics was dominated by which side of the civil war you(or your parents) were on. Right now we have 3 major parties and I expect their collective vote to diminish in the future.

I think most parties are willing to work negotiate with each other for a government too, even if their rhetoric says otherwise at times. FG and FF are in government now and the further away we get from associating Sinn Fein with the Troubles in NI the less defensible it will be to not negotiate with them. I think if two parties were the only viable government and they couldn't work together and went back to throw another election instead they'd most likely get punished for it because people are happy to move their votes around. So there's a strong incentive to work together, even they don't like each other.

Yes. First Past The Post plays a huge role in this.

The only multi-party system that uses FPTP is the UK, and except for the Lib Dems, they've got regional parties that pick up seats. But the Lib Dems have all of the third party FPTP problems you'd expect: the Conservatives often don't have to get 50% to win a seat, because Lib/Lab steal votes from each other.

Also, minor parties in the US barely work on winning local elections - there's enough one-party localities that a third party could conceivably win local races (imagine if the Greens had a viable Mayoral candidate for NYC or Philadelphia - in a town where Republicans usually get 10-20% of the vote, you're not risking a 40-30-30 split where the GOP wins a race they'd normally lose 42-58).