US Politics Thread |OT| SAD TRUMP

[Mandark]

Republican president signs tax cuts that especially benefit the richest, says they will pay for themselves by boosting the economy. They don't. They blow a hole in the budget.

Democratic president feels obligation to close the deficit, raises taxes (but not back to the original rates), signs onto austerity or PAYGO, his party gets slaughtered in the midterms.

Some extremely Lucy-with-the-football shit.

[Nola]

Yeah, IDK, I just struggle to see the benefit of latching onto PAYGO in 2018?

PAYGO is one of those Third Way zombies the Democratic Party latched onto to address the hole in the deficit from Reagan, and went on to embrace it as a reactionary appeal around Post-Reagan assumptions of the electorate, that's ongoing embrace has never really meaningfully achieved any of the goals, on any front, but somehow the party keeps nurturing it back from the dead, despite all evidence that it's a pointless self-constraint(it didn't really rebuild the reputation of the Democratic party as fiscally responsible to the centrists and moderate Republicans they we're trying to court, it didn't actually create a meaningful fiscal precedent because Republicans just ignore it or use it as a bludgeon against Dems in the process of being irresponsible, and it subtlely forces the party to prioritize in a way that results in process and policy outcomes that often isn't appealing to their base).

[TakingBackSunday]

Trump fucking threatened to END TRADE

This moron has no idea what trade is.

Think about it.

Not 'free trade' or 'international trade'. Just plain fucking trade.

He talks about it like it's a fucking hand-out.

Holy shit.

What a moron.

What a dope.

And he'll likely be reelected.

Nah

[Kara]

If you haven’t noticed, the millennial Democrats are considerably more liberal than the older ones and the actuarial tables are on their side.

This sounds an awful lot like the "Texas is going to be a battleground state before there's a second Military Reconstruction" meme that floated around before 2016.

[Joe Molotov]

If you haven’t noticed, the millennial Democrats are considerably more liberal than the older ones and the actuarial tables are on their side.

This sounds an awful lot like the "Texas is going to be a battleground state before there's a second Military Reconstruction" meme that floated around before 2016.

But muh demografix! 

[Nola]

I mean to an extent I get where he's coming from, but Texas is trending bluer demographically, just not on the time schedule many assumed 10 years ago(which was probably always a bit premature).

I think 2020-2024, like some optimists think, is probably incredibly premature as well.

But given how crap the Democratic party is at making inroads in red states, the GOP probably has even longer before they worry about Texas going purple again.

Also, things like this will certainly help:
https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1006183376448032768

As a side commentary: fuck left leaning voters that refuse to do the bare minimum in a democracy because a candidate doesn't check off all their feel boxes just right.

[Tasty]

As a side commentary: fuck left leaning voters that refuse to do the bare minimum in a democracy because a candidate doesn't check off all their feel boxes just right.

Paging TIMU.

[Tasty]

these supreme court rulings are getting worse all the time

It's almost like who we elect to appoint SC justices matters.

Paging TIMU's sorry ass once again.

[Nintex]

This is actually happening 

https://twitter.com/ABC/status/1006233864912756736

[Nola]

these supreme court rulings are getting worse all the time

It's almost like who we elect to appoint SC justices matters.

Paging TIMU's sorry ass once again.

And the next presidential election will in all likelihood decide a generation with even more lifetime court appointees needing to be filled and Kennedy/Ginsburg likely hanging it up in the next 6 years.

Which in response I suspect is going to drastically reduce the level of already low tolerance I have toward Optimus style accelerationists decrying a lack of ideological purity on the part of congressional/presidential nominees(or worse, lifting internet culture wars above all else) for why they pout and stay home or flirt with voting for Trump or a third party.

[ToxicAdam]

[Brehvolution]

 

[team filler]

these supreme court rulings are getting worse all the time

It's almost like who we elect to appoint SC justices matters.

Paging TIMU's sorry ass once again.

didn't matter with obama 

[D3RANG3D]

[kingv]

(Image removed from quote.)

Older the berry the sweeter the juice.

[kingv]

Now that June 11 has come and gone without “The Storm” commencing, Q is out again with some sick drops.

Too bad hungrynoob And Etoilet aren’t here to share in the disappointment.

[Joe Molotov]

Now that June 11 has come and gone without “The Storm” commencing, Q is out again with some sick drops.

Too bad hungrynoob And Etoilet aren’t here to share in the disappointment.

https://twitter.com/BillCorbett/status/1006159313289797633

[Mandark]

Now that June 11 has come and gone without “The Storm” commencing, Q is out again with some sick drops.

Too bad hungrynoob And Etoilet aren’t here to share in the disappointment.

Took a couple minutes to find hungry posting on Reddit and I wish I hadn't. He's allllll the way in the deep end on this shit.

spoiler (click to show/hide)

I'd probably still roast him if he came back here, cause I'm a hypocrite.

[close]

[team filler]

https://twitter.com/fearthe_beard11/status/1006359225218371584
https://twitter.com/fearthe_beard11/status/1006349231672573952
 

[VomKriege]

He and Trump Double Team on NK for an epic game of Simon Sez with Kim

[team filler]

https://twitter.com/Amy_Siskind/status/1006345835871956993

 

[Nola]

Amy Siskind is a respect/hate figure for me.

On the one hand, her "list" is a surprisingly good aggregator if you miss a week and want to see what fuckery went on. On the other hand, she has a Twitter account, and on that Twitter account she regularly lets herself fall down the rabbit hole of some serious TDS in really cringe inducing ways. I had to just unfollow her some time ago.

spoiler (click to show/hide)

But if it keeps people energized over Trump's fuckery, eh, go for it I guess.

[close]

[benjipwns]

https://twitter.com/Amy_Siskind/status/1006345835871956993

open ur heart amy, let america deep inside u, like dennis has

 

[VomKriege]

https://twitter.com/JenniferJJacobs/status/1006465798460723200

Amazing. 

[Rufus]

Agreed to no timeframe. So, yeah, pretty much.

[kingv]

Damn, the President got fucking rolled. Made a bunch of concessions to North Korea for literally fucking nothing.

[Atramental]

https://nypost.com/2018/06/11/dennis-rodman-weeps-over-historic-north-korea-summit/

edit: Ah, filler and benji beat me. 

[VomKriege]

Damn, the President got fucking rolled. Made a bunch of concessions to North Korea for literally fucking nothing.

Of course he did, was there ever any doubt ? He bragged about not preparing.

[VomKriege]

https://twitter.com/AP_Politics/status/1006499084683960321

Edit : seems this is it.
"Yeah Get some more padding from Corbis, that dunking basket player or that farmer planting seed, whatever."

[Joe Molotov]

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/464217937516040193

[Great Rumbler]

So, apparently Trump agreed to halt military exercises with SK without telling either SK or the Pentagon.

[agrajag]

Nintex post if you are ok

[El Babua]

Trump joining #JucheGang

[studyguy]

We're never going to pull out of the south china sea, this is a whole lotta dick waving for nothing.

[Nola]

We're never going to pull out of the south china sea, this is a whole lotta dick waving for nothing.

Though it does beg the question, what happens if we don’t make good on the ad hoc concessions of stopping military excercises while mirroring the rhetoric of NK and pressuring South Korea with the threat of troop withdrawel that Trump promised in the heat of passion?

Unless they think they can roll him again, seems like Trump at any point going back on that(which I’m sure Mattis, Pompeo, and Bolton are already giving him an earful on) gives NK and China grounds to accuse the US of the sort of bad faith we accused NK of in the past, and they would have cause. Making the sanction pressure almost impossible to reestablish if China jumps off board.

[agrajag]

Nintex post if you are ok

He'll be back once he's finished rereading art of the deal.

https://twitter.com/mitchellvii/status/845378894517686273?lang=en

[Joe Molotov]

Nintex post if you are ok

He'll be back once he's finished rereading art of the deal.

https://twitter.com/mitchellvii/status/845378894517686273?lang=en

He's probably just trying to get Trump to pardon his Donkey Kong records.

[kingv]

https://twitter.com/ryanstruyk/status/1006536100821729280?s=21

Sounds legit.

[Kara]

I don't believe for one minute it will happen, especially with Dealbreaker Jones in charge, but a president actually saying he'll end the joint exercises with the ROK is awesome.

[Cauliflower Of Love]

https://twitter.com/AP_Politics/status/1006499084683960321

Edit : seems this is it.
"Yeah Get some more padding from Corbis, that dunking basket player or that farmer planting seed, whatever."

[Nola]

I don't believe for one minute it will happen, especially with Dealbreaker Jones in charge, but a president actually saying he'll end the joint exercises with the ROK is awesome.

Elaborate?

From my perspective, if your end game is a stable peninsula and denuclearization, you would probably want something in return for giving up a major want that the other side has sought? Why waste that leverage at this point?

Thinking about it more, you put yourself in a pretty awkward position if you do this and Kim doesn't reciprocate in some yet undefined way, or you walk it back realizing the above. You are almost forcing both sides to escalate tensions given what they will tell their respective audiences. IDK, maybe in a vacuum reducing our footprint makes sense, unprovoked without establishing a get of your own in a negotiation toward denuclearization? I'm skeptical.

[team filler]

It's 105 degrees today and I don't feel like voting.
 

don't bother. no matter who wins, life is still garbage 

[kingv]

Idk why but Trump and Kim going out for ice cream for lunch is hilarious to me

I feel like Trump just talks at him really
Loud and Kim smiles and nods

[Nola]

https://twitter.com/ryanstruyk/status/1006536100821729280?s=21

Sounds legit.

Missed this. I guess if true(emphasis on the "if") that would be a disproportionate exchange, but it would at least establish an exchange and not a full on giveaway.

[Kara]

Elaborate?

From my perspective, if your end game is a stable peninsula and denuclearization, you would probably want something in return for giving up a major want that the other side has sought? Why waste that leverage at this point?

Thinking about it more, you put yourself in a pretty awkward position if you do this and Kim doesn't reciprocate in some yet undefined way, or you walk it back realizing the above. You are almost forcing both sides to escalate tensions given what they will tell their respective audiences. IDK, maybe in a vacuum reducing our footprint makes sense, unprovoked without establishing a get of your own in a negotiation toward denuclearization? I'm skeptical.

I appreciate that you are a person of thought, but there are times when we should lean on our morals instead of our game theory. "Ending a 70 year war between 2 states we helped create that has perpetuated itself for so long in no small part thanks to us," seems like a situation where that would apply and it won't happen as long as the U.S. military is in Korea, let alone in Korea rattling sabers. Now the idea is possible—albeit far from realized—and that's great.

Also, to be blunt, "we can't have stability and denuclearization in Korea without the U.S. negotiating it," is an argument that has no basis in all hitherto existing Korean history.

[Nola]

Elaborate?

From my perspective, if your end game is a stable peninsula and denuclearization, you would probably want something in return for giving up a major want that the other side has sought? Why waste that leverage at this point?

Thinking about it more, you put yourself in a pretty awkward position if you do this and Kim doesn't reciprocate in some yet undefined way, or you walk it back realizing the above. You are almost forcing both sides to escalate tensions given what they will tell their respective audiences. IDK, maybe in a vacuum reducing our footprint makes sense, unprovoked without establishing a get of your own in a negotiation toward denuclearization? I'm skeptical.

I appreciate that you are a person of thought, but there are times when we should lean on our morals instead of our game theory. "Ending a 70 year war between 2 states we helped create that has perpetuated itself for so long in no small part thanks to us," seems like a situation where that would apply and it won't happen as long as the U.S. military is in Korea, let alone in Korea rattling sabers. Now the idea is possible—albeit far from realized—and that's great.

Also, to be blunt, "we can't have stability and denuclearization in Korea without the U.S. negotiating it," is an argument that has no basis in all hitherto existing Korean history.

Just to clarify that's not really a point I was making or personally defending though. Though I would say to that point anyways, that America and more importantly the Trump administration definitely does think that. So I find myself analyzing this primarily with those sorts of self-imposed constraints in mind.

Though I am not really sure you can separate out the reality and the idealism too long, less you stray too far into the realm of unrealistic expectations. At least that is true for me. I mean there is the vacuum ideal of how I wish America could be on the world stage, and the reality of how things are, and what the realistic paths we have are due to those constraints.

Like my idealistic side says, 'oh cool, we are agreeing to reduce our military footprint in a region we probably should have revisited a lot of these assumptions for being there a long time ago' and the practical side goes 'wait, we are doing this from a stance as a chief negotiator seeking CVID and regional stability and we just handed off a piece of leverage and offered it as a disproportionate concession for no real reason. And the guy we did it for is in charge of a regime notoriously prone to dishonesty and malfeasance and the guy in charge of our country quick to mood shifts, slights and temper... Is this actually helpful in getting us to my ideal or the ideal of the US government or did we just inject something into the process haphazardly that in the larger context could prove to be a problem on many fronts?'

[Tasty]

The great thing is, if Nintex is right it's great for the world and I don't feel bad about being wrong.

But if Nintex is wrong the entertainment will be great too.

Literal win-win scenario.

[VomKriege]

I'm gonna agree with Nola that O would have sought something in exchange for the token of yearly military wargames even if I can see why it might be desirable to challenge the assumption of permanent military presence.

Also the fact that the ROK and Japan weren't maybe even notified in advance is a dick move. They're the most liable to get a missile their way.

[Nola]

I'm gonna agree with Nola that O would have sought something in exchange for the token of yearly military wargames even if I can see why it might be desirable to challenge the assumption of permanent military presence.

Also the fact that the ROK and Japan weren't maybe even notified in advance is a dick move. They're the most liable to get a missile their way.

Yeah thats something I didn't even mention, it was already reported that the whole lead up was hasty and poorly coordinated, which is why many suspect the agreement signed didn't even extract one or two minor concrete concessions or a better agreed upon definition of denuclearization(even if still keeping it vague enough to give both sides cover given they wide disagreement on that). I mean maybe it all comes out of the wash fine(hopefully it does) and nintex gets to celebrate his Nostradamus forecasting skills, but it definitely seems like something you would want to offer in different context. Especially since if I am correct the next drills aren't til next year?

Also, it's hard to ever know with Trump, but it gets back to something Mandark said a while ago, but the statements by Trump after the summit seem to imply he thinks North Korea agreed to unilateral disarmament, and that couldn't be further from the truth. So what happens when Trump realizes, or is forced to confront, that rapid denuclearization isn't happening?

...On another note, ATT-Time Warner merger went through.

[kingv]

I’m not sure I see a moral case for withdrawing from the Korean Peninsula. We are still officially at war with North Korea as is South Korea. Their official policy is to invade South Korea and reunify it, under North Korean rule. They have the 4th biggest military in the world and would have probably invaded South Korea years ago apart from American defense of the South Korean democratic government.

It’s all well and good to say “oh there is only two countries because of American interventionism” but I would never suggest that a Korea unified under Kim Jong Un is net-net an improvement.

[Mandark]

Corey Stewart, who almost got the Republican nomination in Virginia by, um, "running to the right on cultural issues" might get their nomination for the Senate seat. Dude took several days and tons of badgering to distance himself from Paul f'n Nehlen.

Also, Sessions is changing asylum rules so that victims of domestic violence and anti-LBGT violence no longer qualify. In part the reasoning is "well a lot of these people are from violent countries anyways, so who's to say they wouldn't be victims otherwise? eh?"

Also a lawsuit asking the courts to declare the pre-existing condition rules in the ACA unconstitutional, which the administration is backing.

So some cool stuff.

[benjipwns]

the corporate media is so pissed off right now, instead of the war Hillary would have given them we have a historic most historic peace agreement in history made by the ultimate deal maker entirely against the wishes of the corporate media's dreamboat crush neoliberal corporate shills like Justin Trudeau

all while all the Dimmocrats have to offer is the same old failed Chuck Pelosi Obama Iran-Syria-Libya-Hillary-Benghazi policies of the past like cutting our military to the bone and appeasing tyrants rather than the peace through strength of Ronaldus Maximus and The Donald

[benjipwns]

I’m not sure I see a moral case for withdrawing from the Korean Peninsula. We are still officially at war with North Korea

it's a "police action" buster

get it right or the President From Pendergast will have to take a tire iron to some kneecaps

[benjipwns]

  time for a new version of this, adult swim

[Joe Molotov]

I don’t like this new Gamergate troll Benji. What happened to the old moderate Democrat Benji we all fell in love with?

[benjipwns]

https://theintercept.com/2018/06/12/the-democratic-partys-2018-view-of-identity-politics-is-confusing-and-thus-appears-cynical-and-opportunistic/

At roughly the same time, Clinton supporter Gloria Steinem said female supporters of Sanders were motivated by a primitive impulse to follow “the boys,” who, she claimed, were behind Sanders. Just this week, the Clinton loyalist and Salon writer Amanda Marcotte said Trump won “because some dudes had mommy issues,” then clarified that she was referring to left-wing misogynists who did not support Clinton: “I also have those moments where I’m like, ‘Maybe we need to run Bland White Guy 2020 to appease the fake socialists and jackass mansplainers.'”

But that’s not the ethos or philosophy that the Democratic establishment embraces when it’s their centrist, pro-status-quo candidates who are women, LGBT people, or people of color, at which point it becomes a moral obligation to support them and evidence of bigotry if one refuses to do so. Indeed, supporters of Sanders throughout 2015 and 2016 endlessly and vocally insisted that their preference was due to ideology, not misogyny, yet they still had the label “Bernie bro” affixed to their forehead.

“identity politics” does not mean that one should automatically support a woman or person of color over a white male. That’s the right wing’s caricature of the theory. (Though it’s also quite arguably the theory advanced by Clinton supporters in 2016 against Sanders supporters.)

spoiler (click to show/hide)

spoiler (click to show/hide)

*pushes over the magazine rack and runs*

[close]

[close]

[kingv]

Haha, I knew Glenn wrote that before even clicking through.

[Nola]

https://twitter.com/TheDailyShow/status/1006701349910675457

[benjipwns]

not even comparable, Obama was weak and feckless and so got rolled constantly like in the disastrous Iran deal with the mad mullahs and Uranium One and the Syrian "red line" and his apology tour

while as a worldly person, Trump showed strength by calling Kim Jong Un "little rocketman" on Twitter and threatening him with fire and fury

lrn 2 foreign policy sometime lieberals

spoiler (click to show/hide)

literally at 6:08

[close]

[VomKriege]

I’m not sure I see a moral case for withdrawing from the Korean Peninsula. We are still officially at war with North Korea as is South Korea. Their official policy is to invade South Korea and reunify it, under North Korean rule. They have the 4th biggest military in the world and would have probably invaded South Korea years ago apart from American defense of the South Korean democratic government.

It’s all well and good to say “oh there is only two countries because of American interventionism” but I would never suggest that a Korea unified under Kim Jong Un is net-net an improvement.

"4th army in the world like Saddam's Irak" or "Actual 4th army in the world" ?
I have a hard time time believing the DPRK could really invade the ROK and its own and with impunity. And any scenario where we're there probably need to account for China and Japan even without any US involvement.

I think the DPRK is pursuing a clever policy for eventual reunification but they need some compliance or cooperation from the ROK in order to do so. It's obvious that an US retrieval is indeed a necessary step for them but it could be argued that it may also undermine a lot of the DPRK own discourse internally.