2024 Election Discussion General

[Yimpa]

 

[Happy Lizard]

@Husseinisdoingfine not saying that everything in the world is a script and books are the source of reality, but reading the book Upheaval by Jared Diamond gave me a lot of insights on how nations that suffered serious authoritarians and shit situations managed to later move up in development. It’s a very good book, he says that every nation of these had a sort of an existential crisis the led it to find a way to better development, that’s way Germany for example locked at green because they failed so badly like Leo says. He thinks Trump is the catalyst for the US but god knows what this means and how it will look.

[What Am I]

21 minutes ago, Jodistrict said:

In many ways they are more intelligent than the establishment “experts” who were predicting Kamala Harris would win.

This is also something not getting enough attention. The Polymarket odds were practically a perfect match for where the results ended up being. And it seems X was more representative as well.

[Joshe]

1 hour ago, What Am I said:

Something I've seen discussed is the fervor Democrats had for expanding the supreme court and killing the filibuster. It's thought that they planned to perform those actions, assuming they ended up in the position the Republicans currently hold. The question now is whether the Republicans should use those exact tactics.

Would you like them to? Does it make you excited that they might use the Dems strategy against them? Would you like to see that? Would it give you a thrill?

[What Am I]

12 minutes ago, Joshe said:

Would you like them to? Does it make you excited that they might use the Dems strategy against them? Would you like to see that? Would it give you a thrill?

In my second post a few down from this one, I clarified that bluffing could perhaps be used as a strategy for backing them off in the future from that very silly idea.

@Joshe do you also see it as a poor strategy on the Dems part, lacking in foresight, and with obvious consequences? Or is it something you think they should have done if given the chance?

Edited 4 hours ago by What Am I

[Joshe]

6 minutes ago, What Am I said:

In my second post a few down from this one, I clarified that bluffing could perhaps be used as a strategy for backing them off in the future from that very silly idea.

I asked you if you'd get a thrill from it, not what you thought about it strategically. I just ask because I get the sense that you'd like to see the Dems get wrecked every which way possible. 

Centrists like to do this thing where they conceal how they feel by talking about strategy. Sagar on Breaking Points is a good example. A politician he likes could do the most fucked up thing and rather than ever condemning the action, he'll just say "strategically, it makes sense". 

 

 

[Joshe]

On another note: It seems many young male Trump supporters these days are sadistic narcissists. They love to jab a stick in the side of people they hate. For example, I expressed some discontent about Trump's victory and a kid was like "seethe harder" or "cope more", or whatever. You can see this behavior all over the internet. 

The biggest thrill they got from a Trump victory isn't that he's going to improve things, but that many people were hurt by it. They revel in the pain of others. Interesting.

 

 

[What Am I]

8 minutes ago, Joshe said:

I asked you if you'd get a thrill from it, not what you thought about it strategically. I just ask because I get the sense that you'd like to see the Dems get wrecked every which way possible. 

Centrists like to do this thing where they conceal how they feel by talking about strategy. Sagar on Breaking Points is a good example. A politician he likes could do the most fucked up thing and rather than ever condemning the action, he'll just say "strategically, it makes sense".

I would not be in favor of it, because I perceive it as a loss of fairness and a breaking of the rules to gain an advantage. I experience a natural dislike at the thought of either side performing this strategy. I think I'm the opposite of being attached to it actually happening.

Though to be 100% honest, the irony of Republicans' current ability to turn a powerful weapon against their foes which previously was threatening them does illicit a certain feeling that's difficult to describe. Maybe you're not completely off in calling it a "thrill." But I know better than to wish for it to actually happen.

Do you think the Democrats should have used the strategy if they had the chance? And I guess to add on, did you have any kind of emotional attachment to it?

Edited 4 hours ago by What Am I

[What Am I]

11 minutes ago, Joshe said:

On another note: It seems many young male Trump supporters these days are sadistic narcissists. They love to jab a stick in the side of people they hate. For example, I expressed some discontent about Trump's victory and a kid was like "seethe harder" or "cope more", or whatever. You can see this behavior all over the internet. 

The biggest thrill they got from a Trump victory isn't that he's going to improve things, but that many people were hurt by it. They revel in the pain of others. Interesting.

I'm not sure how old you are, but 2020 is a very strong example in the opposite direction. This is one time where the most hated words "both sides" definitely applies.

Also, ironically, it may be the very same people gloating as it was in 2020, lol. It's strange circumstances with the shifts that occurred.

Edited 4 hours ago by What Am I

[zazen]

50 minutes ago, Jodistrict said:

The word progressive is being used as a general term but exactly what is progressive?   Is allowing men in women’s sports progressive?  Who said so?  Who is it that declares this to be progressive?   This isn’t a trivial issue because this indulgent excess was part of what turned the majority of Americans against the democratic party.  And no these Amercans are not dumb low information voters.  In many ways they are more intelligent than the establishment “experts” who were predicting Kamala Harris would win.

Exactly. Progressing into what?

This image is key to understanding why the Republicans not only won, but won bigly.

[Thought Art]

@zazen it all boils down to a single image right on.

[Joshe]

51 minutes ago, What Am I said:

Maybe you're not completely off in calling it a "thrill." But I know better than to wish for it to actually happen.

Cognitively and logically, you can condemn it because you know it's not good, but you're emotionally enticed by it. This emotional bias stems from somewhere. Most likely, disdain for the establishment. For many, this emotional bias is the veil which hides Trump's devilry in its totality. And I'm guessing since Trump harp's against the establishment, you like that too, which makes it difficult for you to accept the truth of his character.  

51 minutes ago, What Am I said:

Do you think the Democrats should have used the strategy if they had the chance?

No idea. If they wanted to reverse Trump's corruption via corruption, I don't blame them because that's how things work. When someone punches you in the face, you want to punch them back. Better off for no one to ever punch anyone in the face to begin with. When punching in the face is praised and rewarded and condoned, don't be surprised if it becomes commonplace. 

Edit: I don't know enough of what's going on to know if I myself would call it a good idea.

Edited 3 hours ago by Joshe

[What Am I]

8 minutes ago, Joshe said:

Cognitively and logically, you can condemn it because you know it's not good, but you're emotionally enticed by it. This emotional bias stems from somewhere. Most likely, disdain for the establishment. For many, this emotional bias is the veil which hides Trump's devilry in its totality. And I'm guessing since Trump harp's against the establishment, you like that too, which makes it difficult for you to accept the truth of his character. 

For me, it could be as simple as an emotional satisfaction from seeing the potential for a perceived comeuppance. Kind of a "careful what you wish for" only in reverse. I found the strategy so distasteful and unfair that I appreciate the opportunity for its dangers to now be understood by all, without anyone actually having to initiate it.

But it could also be that I've been slightly drawn into tribal cheering, despite my best efforts.

9 minutes ago, Joshe said:

No idea. If they wanted to reverse Trump's corruption via corruption, I don't blame them because that's how things work. When someone punches you in the face, you want to punch them back. Better off for no one to ever punch anyone in the face to begin with. When punching in the face is praised and rewarded and condoned, don't be surprised if it becomes commonplace.

Sounds like we're mostly in agreement.

Did you have any feelings about it one way or the other? Would it have felt good on an emotional level to see Democrats do such a thing?

[Joshe]

10 minutes ago, What Am I said:

Did you have any feelings about it one way or the other? Would it have felt good on an emotional level to see Democrats do such a thing?

I don't know enough about it, so no. If we could just get an impartial and integrous SCOTUS, I'd be happy with that. SCOTUS should not be tampered with by either side, but it's too late for that. Trump brags about corrupting the court. Calls it his greatest achievement.

If the Dems could do something to reverse the SCOTUS corruption, I'd be fine with that so long as they themselves don't corrupt it in their favor. I would just like to see justice and integrity. I don't give two shits about the Dems and their party. I just want integrity. I would commend anyone who can deliver that, but I wouldn't get an emotional thrill out of it. I would feel a sense of justice and pride, which makes me feel good, but I wouldn't call it a thrill. 

Edited 3 hours ago by Joshe

[Recursoinominado]

22 minutes ago, Thought Art said:

@zazen it all boils down to a single image right on.

and being SWOLE

[Husseinisdoingfine]

1 hour ago, zazen said:

 

Yeah, a lot of the reason why people voted Rep. was the cultural war. People were freaking out over trans people and illegal immigrants.

[What Am I]

12 minutes ago, Joshe said:

I don't know enough about it, so no. If we could just get an impartial and integrous SCOTUS, I'd be happy with that. SCOTUS should not be tampered with by either side, but it's too late for that. Trump brags about corrupting the court. Calls it his greatest achievement.

If the Dems could do something to reverse the SCOTUS corruption, I'd be fine with that so long as they themselves don't corrupt it in their favor. I would just like to see justice and integrity. I don't give two shits about the Dems and their party. I just want integrity. I would commend anyone who can deliver that, but I wouldn't get an emotional thrill out of it. I would feel a sense of justice and pride, which makes me feel good, but I wouldn't call it a thrill. 

I think the bolded text is just about the perfect answer, and something I would have wished for as well had the Democrats won.

With our current situation, unfortunately, it may be too tall of an order to expect Republicans to display the nobility needed to intentionally let their own SCOTUS advantage slip. But I'm hoping they at least have enough character to not push that advantage in unsightly ways.

Also, and I may not be informed enough to argue this correctly, but calling Trump's changes to SCOTUS "corrupt" may be a bit of a stretch. With what I know, I'd call it being very lucky due to circumstances and playing the hand you're dealt.

Edited 3 hours ago by What Am I

[zurew]

RFK Jr being the department of health guy will be interesting.

That guy cant parse through a single science paper without stumbling 5 times, but Im sure his vibe based health advice will be legendary.

[Joshe]

1 hour ago, What Am I said:

I'm not sure how old you are, but 2020 is a very strong example in the opposite direction. This is one time where the most hated words "both sides" definitely applies.

Also, ironically, it may be the very same people gloating as it was in 2020, lol. It's strange circumstances with the shifts that occurred.

I'm 38. 

You're right. I shouldn't have attributed the phenomenon to just Trump supporters. It's seems to be a common trend amongst young men in general. Although, young men in general skew heavily towards Trump, AFAIK.

The sadism/schadenfreude in 2024 seems to be amped up, but it makes sense that the phenomenon would intensify the more polarized we become. Yet another reason to not have the president of the US constantly polarizing us... always giving the middle finger to those not on his side. But, it's what the people like. 

[What Am I]

2 minutes ago, Joshe said:

I'm 38. 

You're right. I shouldn't have attributed the phenomenon to just Trump supporters. It's seems to be a common trend amongst young men in general. Although, young men in general skew heavily towards Trump, AFAIK.

The sadism/schadenfreude in 2024 seems to be amped up, but it makes sense that the phenomenon would intensify the more polarized we become. Yet another reason to not have the president of the US constantly polarizing us... always giving the middle finger to those not on his side. But, it's what the people like. 

Ah, a peer! Nice to know. No wonder your sentences aren't a jumbled mess of ideas, lol. I'm just slightly your senior.

Agreed on your thoughts concerning these young immature kids who feel the need to gloat. It does seem like an increasing trend, even if it did occur previously.