Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 395: North Korea Goes Ballistic

(+) Yeah! (+)

I can't see Corrik posts because I have standards, but anybody who would legitimately vote for Oz is a lost cause and there's no reason to give them an inch.

Respect is a two way street. Republicans have shown no respect for Democrats. I don't see why we should ever show them any respect ever again. Especially given their frankly insane beliefs. They have Lauren Boebert and Margey Greene and Donald Trump representing them. They allowed this. This wasn't our doing. This was theirs.

masterplum posted

Like Corrik, who voted R his entire life was smart enough not to vote for Trump.

Corrik7 posted...

If you run Trump vs Hillary in 2024, I am voting Trump

That didnt last long

Corrik what are some current Republican ideals you agree with?

Jakyl25 posted...

Corrik what are some current Republican ideals you agree with?

We gonna rehash the same things again. We already know where I stand. If you didn't want a barometer on PA moderate Republicans voting this election, so be it.

We aren't gonna have the same conversation a 20th time though.

Shapiro > Mastriano
Oz > Fetterman

Shapiro will landslide win. Oz will be closer I am sure. Oz had alienated some people like me initially and the other candidate likely was a lot better that lost in the primary, but Fetterman has made an Oz vote look not so bad anymore. It always interested me reading the articles asking if Fetterman could just troll and shitpost his way to the Senate over social media. After last night, idk. He should let Snooki keep talking for him.

As far as numbers, who cares about numbers right now. Republicans will hold the house. Nothing will pass the rest of bidens term again congressionally. Whether it's a Republican senate or not, doesn't affect this 2 years. None of bidens agenda will pass, and Republicans cannot defeat a veto. Doesn't matter if 52 51 50 49 48 47 46 Republican senators.

Senators serve a six-year term; please do not think of only the next two years when choosing a Senator.

Yeah Oz, who has been a slimeball his entire life, being in the senate 6 years seems pretty bad for everyone not named Oz

Corrik7 posted...

We gonna rehash the same things again. We already know where I stand. If you didn't want a barometer on PA moderate Republicans voting this election, so be it.

We aren't gonna have the same conversation a 20th time though.

Shapiro > Mastriano
Oz > Fetterman

Shapiro will landslide win. Oz will be closer I am sure. Oz had alienated some people like me initially and the other candidate likely was a lot better that lost in the primary, but Fetterman has made an Oz vote look not so bad anymore. It always interested me reading the articles asking if Fetterman could just troll and shitpost his way to the Senate over social media. After last night, idk. He should let Snooki keep talking for him.

I wanna rehash things again because the Republican Party has shifted its priorities and platforms since the last election, so I felt interested in knowing what about their current ideas you support

Corrik is a theoretical swing voter (VERY theoretical) but the amount of effort and luck it would take to convince him is insane. People can't be expected to expend that much fucking time on one person with a historically terrible record.

masterplum posted...

I think democrats have a huge purity test problem. We arent democrats is the unifying tent of the Republican Party and no matter how insane you are, republicans welcome you under that tent.

Democrats seem to constantly want to chase off anyone who isnt solidly LibLeft.

Respectfully, this statement does not correspond to objective reality. Like are you sure you didn't just get this from Fox News? Are the only democrats you interact with the ones in this topic??

masterplum posted...

B8er respects someones beliefs challenge [Impossible]

Beliefs are actually one of the things it's completely okay to judge someone for, so you've actually got the opposite of an impossible challenge here -- this "challenge" is super easy to pass if you're extremely apathetic or, like, a moral coward.

I guess my question for Corrik is: what policies of the Democrats are SO bad that you think it's better to empower the people who are STILL running on the same platform that got you to vote against Trump in 2020 (and apparently against Mastriano now)? I mean, you can rightfully think Trump and Mastriano are insane assholes, unfit for public office...but let's be clear...the ENTIRE GOP either is onboard with their same politics, or is at least willing to compromise their beliefs to empower those people, so long as they hold power.

masterplum posted...

Can we not chase Corrik away.

At the very least I like him here as a barometer of how people feel outside of liberal echo chambers

I could be misreading things a bit but I think it's more that Corrik continually insists he's moderate that grates on a lot of the people here. I don't really want to get into an argument over it or anything, but personally I feel like Corrik is a pretty staunch conservative based on conversations in this topic about state surveillance and a lot of the Bush 43 administration in general. Of course this topic populated almost entirely by people well left of center but no one has ever denied that. Hell, you want to argue that Corrik is closer to the center of American political discourse than most people here I don't think that's all too crazy (though I'd have to think on that some) but that's a very different claim. If we're talking about who is "closest to the center" of the regular posters here I think I'd say that's LotM and I'm not even sure it's all that close.

~~~

Really though I don't care so much about that, this is the point I want to push back on:

masterplum posted...

I think democrats have a huge purity test problem. We arent democrats is the unifying tent of the Republican Party and no matter how insane you are, republicans welcome you under that tent.

Democrats seem to constantly want to chase off anyone who isnt solidly LibLeft.

I think this is completely backwards.

Like maybe in online circles like this topic or whatever there's a little to this - to go back to LotM, despite my pegging him as left-of-center he has taken a shit ton of vitriol from the left here over the years.

But if we're talking about Democrats as a party this just seems flatly untrue. While the national Dem caucus has certainly moved to the left over the past decade it still remains the only real "big tent" party in the country, which is a large part of why it's so dysfunctional. If Dems had a purity test problem they would have successfully drove out Cuellar, an anti-abortion rep from his House seat but they didn't. Peltola in Alaska is pretty pro-second amendment moreso than I bet a lot of liberals would like. Manchin is Manchin.

Meanwhile, the GOP has blown past "purity tests" to a full-blown cult of personality. You say they welcome anyone who isn't a Democrat but they literally just drove everyone who didn't bend the knee to Trump out of office on the national level (and state and lower levels but I don't know the %s). They forced out Liz Cheney, who on her voting record supported the Trump administration's policies in Congress at a rate well ahead of her replacement within the House GOP. They will and have driven out ruby red conservatives on the sole basis that they spoke out against Trump's most egregious acts even as they championed and cheer-leaded almost all of his other ones.

Corrik7 posted...

Shapiro > Mastriano
Oz > Fetterman

Shapiro will landslide win. Oz will be closer I am sure. Oz had alienated some people like me initially and the other candidate likely was a lot better that lost in the primary, but Fetterman has made an Oz vote look not so bad anymore. It always interested me reading the articles asking if Fetterman could just troll and shitpost his way to the Senate over social media. After last night, idk. He should let Snooki keep talking for him.

What about Fetterman do you hate enough to make you want to vote for Oz?

Inviso posted...

I guess my question for Corrik is: what policies of the Democrats are SO bad that you think it's better to empower the people who are STILL running on the same platform that got you to vote against Trump in 2020 (and apparently against Mastriano now)? I mean, you can rightfully think Trump and Mastriano are insane assholes, unfit for public office...but let's be clear...the ENTIRE GOP either is onboard with their same politics, or is at least willing to compromise their beliefs to empower those people, so long as they hold power.

Mastriano is worse than everyone you named. He may... idk. This is a big may because I literally hate this guy... may be worse than even Ted Cruz. And that's saying something. I'd literally vote for Hillary over Cruz. Jesus. I feel completely sick even thinking about it.

I don't really have time to go down the rabbit hole right now. My stances remain pretty much unchanged though from before. We need good Republicans and to get rid of idiots like Mastriano who drive me away from the party... or the party away from me moreso.

Trumps policies on paper were fine. His behavior is another story.

Thorn, I agree with your assessment of Plum's statement on-paper, however, I think the issue is that Plum is kind of right when it comes to external focus. Yes, the GOP has become increasingly rabid in purity tests and forcing out moderates in favor of far-right ideologues who will go along with the ideal that 2020 was rigged and the Democrats just cheat and all that. However, that's just the primary; when it comes time for the general election, the GOP voters always come home to roost, because ultimately, someone with an R next to their name is better than someone with a D next to their name. Meanwhile, Democrats are a big tent party, which fucks them consistently.

If a progressive wins a Democratic primary, moderate voters start fretting and thinking "s/he's too far left, and they want to raise our taxes, and I want bipartisanship", and suddenly you have a bloc of voters who either don't turn out at all, or worse, they flip and vote GOP because if neither side represents them, they want (the promise, not reality of) lower taxes because they're self-centered assholes.

If a moderate wins a Democratic primary, you get a vocal group of progressives on social media decrying how they're too moderate and they have x, y and z as flaws, effectively doing the GOP's job of campaigning against the Democratic candidate for them and depressing voter turnout for the party that, at the very least doesn't want to actively roll back existing progressive policies.

KamikazePotato posted...

Corrik is a theoretical swing voter (VERY theoretical) but the amount of effort and luck it would take to convince him is insane. People can't be expected to expend that much fucking time on one person with a historically terrible record.

Or you know, spend time with him because he is a person not because he is a pawn you want to further an agenda

masterplum posted...

because he is a person

Naw.

Corrik7 posted...

We need good Republicans and to get rid of idiots like Mastriano who drive me away from the party... or the party away from me moreso.

The funny thing is a I completely agree with this and would vote for Mitt Romney over half the democrat nominees

...

And that is why I would never vote for Oz

Maybe I misunderstand the use of "purity test" then? Like I agree with you that you can basically summarize the voting behavior of the two sides as something akin to:

Republicans only need one reason to vote
Democrats only need one reason not to vote

But when I hear "purity test" I think of basically mandating that someone hold views x, y, and z to even be considered part of the group. That Dems function more as a coalition of different interest groups pretty much means they can not do this even though they're actually more unified now than they have perhaps ever been (and still are a mess.) Just as this results in you having a wider spectrum of views represented within the party both on an elected official basis and a voter basis it means you have different groups being pissed off at each other at times.

Like in online circles you might have calls to basically enforce this by basically ejecting Manchin, Cuellar, etc. from the party but it hasn't actually happened. If anything it's a vocal minority. And I say this as someone who thinks the Democratic party really should take a stand on the issue of abortion and that Cuellar should have been successfully primaried. And while that primary was close he still won it. But I've consistently pushed back on the idea that Manchin should be excommunicated or something from the Democrats even though his bullshit infuriates me just as much. He's basically the model of the 50 state strategy, the trade-off of being able to win seats in places that you otherwise have no business holding is they're going to have infuriating positions at times. It's just the objective with such a strategy is to build a majority where you can kind of shuffle them around so say you had 53 Senators and 5 Manchin types. You can ignore Manchin Prime being a problem on coal if you can get 2 of the other Manchin-esque guys to go with you, and meanwhile Manchin himself might come along on say... closing a tax loophole where some of the others won't, etc.

The problem is it just completely breaks down when you need him literally every time. Despite nominally holding the majority, you don't actually command one on certain issues. And it is infuriating.

Fun fact: I don't want to spend time with people who think of me as lesser and vote to take away my rights.

TotallyNotMI posted...

Fun fact: I don't want to spend time with people who think of me as lesser and vote to take away my rights.

That's fine! But also why democrats are losing elections! You don't get it both ways!

Corrik7 posted...

Mastriano is worse than everyone you named. He may... idk. This is a big may because I literally hate this guy... may be worse than even Ted Cruz. And that's saying something. I'd literally vote for Hillary over Cruz. Jesus. I feel completely sick even thinking about it.

I don't really have time to go down the rabbit hole right now. My stances remain pretty much unchanged though from before. We need good Republicans and to get rid of idiots like Mastriano who drive me away from the party... or the party away from me moreso.

Trumps policies on paper were fine. His behavior is another story.

I guess where I'm coming from is...if you keep supporting them, they have zero incentive not to keep running candidates like Mastriano or MTG or Lauren Boebert or Ted Cruz or Ron DeSantis or Donald Trump over more reasonable candidates who might share your conservative beliefs. It's the same thing I say to progressives, honestly: the current GOP needs to be thoroughly defeated and just about wiped out, because right now, they have rapidly become a party whose entire focus is being vitriolic and hateful, in a competition to see who can be the loudest, craziest asshole possible, because that wins GOP primaries.

Their platform is entirely: ban homosexuality, ban abortion, ban voting rights that give a voice to the majority of America. No real economic plans, no plans for how to deal with the increase number of natural disasters being exacerbated by climate change...just a party whose only goals are to hurt the other side however they can.

You've told us in the past that you're a working class Pennsylvanian, and you work in the steel industry. GOP policies don't benefit you. The tariffs on China? That hurts American importers who need Chinese products to aid in the steel industry, not China. Tax cuts on the rich? They don't trickle down to the working class; those companies are legally incentivized to partake in stock buybacks, which increase money for investors, rather than building more plants, more facilities, or paying their employees more.

Gas prices rise, increasing costs. You've argued in the past that Biden should kowtow to Saudi Arabia and oil companies, because it lowers gas prices and benefits Americans. On paper, yes, that's true...but it also sets a precedent that private companies and foreign powers hold more power over American politics than the American people. They can just arbitrarily decide to raise prices on a whim, and hold the country hostage until we give them whatever they want. That just seems unsustainable to me, and it kinda flies in the face of American democracy. Meanwhile, the Democrats at least introduced legislation to try and stop oil companies from price gouging, and the GOP voted against that...so even there, they're not working in your best interests.

masterplum posted...

That's fine! But also why democrats are losing elections! You don't get it both ways!

"Just hang out with people who want to see you dead! Then you can maybe win their vote possibly if you just fall in line with everything they believe. What do I expect from them? Why absolutely nothing of course!"

Dancedreamer posted...

"Just hang out with people who want to see you dead! Then you can maybe win their vote possibly if you just fall in line with everything they believe. What do I expect from them? Why absolutely nothing of course!"

The problem is they are hanging out with the people who actually want to see you dead instead of you, because the people who actually want to see you dead are patting them on the back when they say something extremely insensitive and inviting them to free speech town.

masterplum posted...

Or you know, spend time with him because he is a person not because he is a pawn you want to further an agenda

that's how we know it's not worth it!

That being said plum is ridiculous for not understanding this but he is a both sides type of person so yes.

Anyway fetterman had a stroke and of course doesn't speak as well as a snake oil salesman who has been on national tv for a very long time. Policy matters.

masterplum posted...

That's fine! But also why democrats are losing elections! You don't get it both ways!

They havent lost a lot lately

(Theyre probably about to)

Jakyl25 posted...

They havent lost a lot lately

(Theyre probably about to)

But it shouldn't be close. They are competing against literal fascists

How bottom of the barrel do you have to be to be competitive against fascism!

masterplum posted...

But it shouldn't be close. They are competing against literal fascists

How bottom of the barrel do you have to be to be competitive against fascism!

Alternatively, a lot more Americans are okay with fascism than you may want to admit.

masterplum posted...

But it shouldn't be close. They are competing against literal fascists

How bottom of the barrel do you have to be to be competitive against fascism!

Turns out large portions of the country like fascism as long as it targets people they don't like.

And a lot of others are more scared of socialist boogeyman and cancel culture then literal fascists.

masterplum posted...

That's fine! But also why democrats are losing elections! You don't get it both ways!

"You can't win elections AND be alive! You've gotta just give in to the people that want you dead to win elections! Silly libruhls, so many demands!"

masterplum posted...

But it shouldn't be close. They are competing against literal fascists

How bottom of the barrel do you have to be to be competitive against fascism!

Spoilers: A lot more people like fascism than you'd think, it turns out.

HashtagSEP posted...

"You can't win elections AND be alive! You've gotta just give in to the people that want you dead to win elections! Silly libruhls, so many demands!"

This is obviously ridiculous hyperbole but also yes? If your options are lose elections and die or win elections and not get everything you want I think the choice is pretty obvious

masterplum posted...

This is obviously ridiculous hyperbole but also yes? If your options are lose elections and die or win elections and not get everything you want I think the choice is pretty obvious

Except you're not going to win elections because your entire argument is based on this myth that there is a large mass of people that will "oh gee I'll stop wanting you dead and vote with you because you were nice to me on the internet." In practice, all you're preaching is to give those people what they want for nothing in return.

No non-negligible number of people are voting Republican simply because they got their feelings hurt by being called out on the terrible things they want. They do it because the Republicans offer them the terrible things they want. All you're saying is "Well, if the Democrats offered them those terrible things, too...!"

Plum is completely divorced from the reality that many, many people live with in this country tbh

"not get everything you want" lmao

masterplum posted...

But it shouldn't be close. They are competing against literal fascists

How bottom of the barrel do you have to be to be competitive against fascism!

Like, if anything, I think this post says it all.

If you have to convince somebody to vote AGAINST fascism, well, uh...

The thing is that most of the people voting Republican aren't willing to listen except to people who affirm their beliefs. They're okay with fascism, and I don't see how I could ever hang out with someone who's okay with fascism. It's like someone said: If you have 10 people at a table, and a Nazi sits down and everyone continues engaging with him, you've got 11 Nazi's.

People who are worth engaging are those who have given up on the Republican party. Because they reject fascism. They see the party for what it is. I feel like that's a pretty reasonable explanation given that many former Republicans have given up on the party.

Dancedreamer posted...

The thing is that most of the people voting Republican aren't willing to listen except to people who affirm their beliefs. They're okay with fascism, and I don't see how I could ever hang out with someone who's okay with fascism. It's like someone said: If you have 10 people at a table, and a Nazi sits down and everyone continues engaging with him, you've got 11 Nazi's.

People who are worth engaging are those who have given up on the Republican party. Because they reject fascism. They see the party for what it is. I feel like that's a pretty reasonable explanation given that many former Republicans have given up on the party.

Sounds like the Nazi is better at explaining his stances and points then. Lol. Maybe you should learn how to engage and have discussion like that Nazi then. Converting 10 different people of other ideologies to their stance is actually quite impressive.

Almost everyone has somewhere they are coming from in their stances. It's seeing where they are coming from and trying to make them see why another way is better that is the winning ticket. Just because you feel your way is better does not mean you actually do or they will agree your way is better.

Corrik7 posted...

Sounds like the Nazi is better at explaining his stances and points then. Lol. Maybe you should learn how to engage and have discussion like that Nazi then. Converting 10 different people of other ideologies to their stance is actually quite impressive.

Almost everyone has somewhere they are coming from in their stances. It's seeing where they are coming from and trying to make them see why another way is better that is the winning ticket. Just because you feel your way is better does not mean you actually do or they will agree your way is better

oh god

Agreed. Got to hire that nazi to be my motivational speaker

The reality is people usually dont vote for fascists in huge numbers because they agree with fascist ideology, its usually ultimately down to economic grievances and fascists replacing mainstream conservatives. The number one thing behind the rise of the Nazis was the state of the economy. That is the same with the Republicans. A lot of their voters are not that extreme, but theyll happily vote for the extreme right if the economy goes bad and theyre the biggest alternative to the current government.

Of course, right-wing economics does not work. Unfortunately people vote against their current situation rather than for a better one not realising that it can always get worse.

LightningStrikes posted...

That is the same with the Republicans. A lot of their voters are not that extreme, but theyll happily vote for the extreme right if the economy goes bad and theyre the biggest alternative to the current government.

This, but it's worth noting that the US economy outside of the coasts and big cities has been collapsing for the last few decades. The GOP at least pretends to care about those people and has a (false) explanation of what's going on with that. Democrats just kind of ignore those places entirely, which limits their ability to do anything considering it's hard to control the Senate when you're writing off half the states.

Xeybozn posted...

This, but it's worth noting that the US economy outside of the coasts and big cities has been collapsing for the last few decades. The GOP at least pretends to care about those people and has a (false) explanation of what's going on with that. Democrats just kind of ignore those places entirely, which limits their ability to do anything considering it's hard to control the Senate when you're writing off half the states.

I want to just point out that the Democrats DON'T ignore those places...Democrats TRY to propose policies that benefit America as a whole (M4A, UBI, Student Loan Forgiveness), but they regularly get rejected in favor of non-solutions from the GOP that are essentially just blaming some outgroup in a way that at least allows those "forgotten" middle American states to feel like they're getting one up on someone weaker than them.

Inviso posted...

I want to just point out that the Democrats DON'T ignore those places...Democrats TRY to propose policies that benefit America as a whole (M4A, UBI, Student Loan Forgiveness), but they regularly get rejected in favor of non-solutions from the GOP that are essentially just blaming some outgroup in a way that at least allows those "forgotten" middle American states to feel like they're getting one up on someone weaker than them.

Those policies aren't what most of the people actually want. It's less important that policies benefit people and more important that they want them. If we have a nation of turkeys and the two parties are the Christmas Party and the Thanksgiving Party, and half the turkeys have been in support of each of them forever, you're not going to get anywhere by creating a third party that runs on a platform of canceling holidays altogether.

Also this topic is throwing a tantrum over the fact that Corrik's vote is literally more important than all of theirs combined because all of their votes are set in stone while there is like a 10-20% chance of Corrik voting for a Democrat. Whereas a million times zero is still zero.

Dems really don't ignore those other communities. But it's hard when conservativism is so entrenched in their beliefs that they believe unions are bad and big corporations have their best interests at heart (unless they approve of the 'icky gay people')

Dancedreamer posted...

Dems really don't ignore those other communities. But it's hard when conservativism is so entrenched in their beliefs that they believe unions are bad and big corporations have their best interests at heart (unless they approve of the 'icky gay people')

That is not an entrenched belief among the majority of working class Americans outside the blue states. The fact that you think that it is demonstrates how the Democratic Party is out of touch.

red_sox_777 posted...

there is like a 10-20% chance of Corrik voting for a Democrat.

no, there's not. have you ever talked to corrik? literally nothing we can say is going to convince him to not vote for dr. oz.

i'm sure he voted for biden because he himself decided he liked biden better than trump, not because anyone on the left convinced him to vote for biden.

Mr_Lasastryke posted...

no, there's not. have you ever talked to corrik? literally nothing we can say is going to convince him to not vote for dr. oz.

i'm sure he voted for biden because he himself decided he liked biden better than trump, not because anyone on the left convinced him to vote for biden.

Of course. He's supposed to vote based on his own decision. He's not a muppet. And I said 10-20% because that's a rough estimate of the percentage of elections in which he's voted for a Democrat or will, based on him saying he has or will vote for 2 Democrats in his life.