Politics Thread: Silicon Valley Edition

[smjjames]

Right now, I'm not in a betting mood, but I'm looking to see whether I think this resistance movement/hate Trump crap will be a winner in the midterms. It might just work, especially in a first administration mid-term election, but it might not and, worse for the opposition party, it might actually backfire. I'll keep thinking and then maybe bet. After all, I'd like to see if the magic mirrors around this joint beat my prognosticating abilities.

 

EDIT: I'm not in a betting mood. I'm not in a better mood either, but I'm also not in a worse one.

 

Well, it's going to depend on the dynamics of each individual race. Doug Jones hardly focused on Trump at all, and he managed to defeat Roy Moore. In some places, it could definetly backfire if it's done too much, that's true. There was one state delegate in Virginia that focused entirely on local issues and avoided Trump entirely, so, again, it'll depend on the dynamics of each individual race.

 

As for 2020 (assuming he is running at all), he does have the incumbency advantage, though it remains to be seen if the Dems can field a candidate that can defeat him.

Edited December 21, 2017 by smjjames

[Epaminondas]

The dynamics of individual races always come down to the candidate and what threshold he has to pass in order to overcome his or her opponent. In some cases, it's presenting a better option. In some cases it's simply being electable in some half-assed way because the opponent is so bad/disliked that people are looking for an excuse to vote against him. If the Republicans can't rehabilitate Trump at least a little before the next election, it won't matter if the country is doing better or not. The dude is a royal pain in my ass.

[Valsuelm]

I know you're a bitter partisan, but this is what happens when you can't get people from the other party to vote on any major piece of legislation. Everything must be passed solely by the party in power, which is harder for the Republicans. After all, unlike the Democrats, at least some of the Republicans vote on principle. However, I think that, in fact, the continuing resolution will go through and hopefully we'll get something even better eventually, which is an actual budget complete with an appropriations process and a look towards funding. They might end up shutting down the government for a few days, but I also think that the public is getting to be inured to this sort of thing. Now, however, if the Dems shut down the government, that'll be a ballsy and iffy move on their part. Won't matter if the GOP can't get their act together in the House, though. In the House, the Democrats can put all the blame on the GOP. In the Senate, that's not the case.

 

I think the current strategy of hate has been successful, and it's driven by a president who gives plenty of fodder to the opposition (aw hell, just about everyone), but at some point the opposition party will have to offer up something other than hating on the pres. By that, I don't just mean CNN, the Washington Post, and the New York Times. Don't forget the Democrats are also part of the opposition party. ...And the Democrats are the elected representative faction of the opposition party, so they have it in their power to do things other than foment this 'resistance' movement.

 

Right now, I'm not in a betting mood, but I'm looking to see whether I think this resistance movement/hate Trump crap will be a winner in the midterms. It might just work, especially in a first administration mid-term election, but it might not and, worse for the opposition party, it might actually backfire. I'll keep thinking and then maybe bet. After all, I'd like to see if the magic mirrors around this joint beat my prognosticating abilities.

 

EDIT: I'm not in a betting mood. I'm not in a better mood either, but I'm also not in a worse one.

 

Eh.... demographics don't bode well in the long run or even mid run for the Republicans or those that vote Trump at the voting booth.

 

Swallowing and ignoring rampant election fraud coast to coast doesn't exactly help either. Of course, pointing that evil out which one has benefited from in the not so distant past isn't exactly wise. Better to let as many of the masses think they still have a say as possible.

 

Rome is burning, has been burning.... a lot of people just haven't noticed yet. In fact some parts of town think the party has never been better.

 

The future's so bright we've gotta wear shades? That's not the sun rising folks....

 

Those that call themselves Democrats will win by default more and more as time goes on. Trump's win (which good Leferd will tell you I called) is more than likely the Elephant's the final hurrah!. This is not cause to celebrate team Donkey. For what will rise up next will gulp near everyone down into darkness.

[Epaminondas]

"Nothing is immutable."

[smjjames]

 

I know you're a bitter partisan, but this is what happens when you can't get people from the other party to vote on any major piece of legislation. Everything must be passed solely by the party in power, which is harder for the Republicans. After all, unlike the Democrats, at least some of the Republicans vote on principle. However, I think that, in fact, the continuing resolution will go through and hopefully we'll get something even better eventually, which is an actual budget complete with an appropriations process and a look towards funding. They might end up shutting down the government for a few days, but I also think that the public is getting to be inured to this sort of thing. Now, however, if the Dems shut down the government, that'll be a ballsy and iffy move on their part. Won't matter if the GOP can't get their act together in the House, though. In the House, the Democrats can put all the blame on the GOP. In the Senate, that's not the case.

 

I think the current strategy of hate has been successful, and it's driven by a president who gives plenty of fodder to the opposition (aw hell, just about everyone), but at some point the opposition party will have to offer up something other than hating on the pres. By that, I don't just mean CNN, the Washington Post, and the New York Times. Don't forget the Democrats are also part of the opposition party. ...And the Democrats are the elected representative faction of the opposition party, so they have it in their power to do things other than foment this 'resistance' movement.

 

Right now, I'm not in a betting mood, but I'm looking to see whether I think this resistance movement/hate Trump crap will be a winner in the midterms. It might just work, especially in a first administration mid-term election, but it might not and, worse for the opposition party, it might actually backfire. I'll keep thinking and then maybe bet. After all, I'd like to see if the magic mirrors around this joint beat my prognosticating abilities.

 

EDIT: I'm not in a betting mood. I'm not in a better mood either, but I'm also not in a worse one.

 

Those that call themselves Democrats will win by default more and more as time goes on. Trump's win (which good Leferd will tell you I called) is more than likely the Elephant's the final hurrah!. This is not cause to celebrate team Donkey. For what will rise up next will gulp near everyone down into darkness.

 

 

Which would be.... team Cthulhu, am I right?

 

In all seriousness though, if the Dems can't find someone who can parry Trumps attacks like a pro and is overall popular (though there probably isn't a politician alive with the same kind of baggage as Hillary did), then even changing demographics won't help.

 

Three years is a very long time in politics these days, so, anything could happen.

Edited December 21, 2017 by smjjames

[redneckdevil]

It hasn't even been a single full year yet with him in office but it feels like the term should be up soon....sigh

[Malcador]

Wonder when Haley will start shaking down UN members.

[Epaminondas]

Wonder when Haley will start shaking down UN members.

Hopefully soon.

[Gfted1]

I don't understand the point of todays UN vote to "rebuke" our decision to move our embassy to Jerusalem. Who cares what they think? And there's nothing they can do about it. I suppose it makes everyone feel more important?

[Malcador]

 

Wonder when Haley will start shaking down UN members.

Hopefully soon.

 

Well that'll be funny, pretty sure the US doesn't give aid out of the generosity of its heart and not like the US is going to use force or something.

 

At least on the UNSC, not sure how many of the non-permanent ones are over a barrel to the US so it seemed a bizarre threat of sorts to make (aside from sounding like some soldato). Is just a bad attitude to have in general, reminiscent of the reaction to allies not wanting to waltz into Iraq. But I guess it sounds hard, so it'll play well.

Edited December 21, 2017 by Malcador

[Zoraptor]

don't understand the point of todays UN vote to "rebuke" our decision to move our embassy to Jerusalem. Who cares what they think? And there's nothing they can do about it. I suppose it makes everyone feel more important

 

 

Who cares what the US and a literal bunch of its colonies think either? Threats and intimidation and 9, nine, votes for. 5% support: how embarrassing.

 

It will be even more hilarious if Trump tries to carry out his threats as that will play straight into China and Russia's hands and hasten the decline of international US influence even more. What's he going to do, cut Saudi Arabia off? South Korea? Rule 1 is don't make threats you can't or won't be able to go through with as whatever happens you end up looking weak or stupid, or have to do something monumentally dumb to not look weak. Much like Obama's Syria red line you end up with only bad choices, and Trump's judgement is so lacking that he might make the monumentally dumb choice instead. Well, a second stupid choice, since he made the Jerusalem one first, a decision even GWB baulked at making.

 

Trump admin is the Seymour Skinner of international affairs: Am I out of touch? No, it's everyone else who is wrong!

Edited December 21, 2017 by Zoraptor

[Gfted1]

Who cares what the US and a literal bunch of its colonies think either? Threats and intimidation and 9, nine, votes for. 5% support: how embarrassing.

Apparently everyone else in the world is butthurt over it to the point of wasting time in a non-binding resolution. That will show us!

[Chilloutman]

 

don't understand the point of todays UN vote to "rebuke" our decision to move our embassy to Jerusalem. Who cares what they think? And there's nothing they can do about it. I suppose it makes everyone feel more important

 

 

Who cares what the US and a literal bunch of its colonies think either? Threats and intimidation and 9, nine, votes for. 5% support: how embarrassing.

 

It will be even more hilarious if Trump tries to carry out his threats as that will play straight into China and Russia's hands and hasten the decline of international US influence even more. What's he going to do, cut Saudi Arabia off? South Korea? Rule 1 is don't make threats you can't or won't be able to go through with as whatever happens you end up looking weak or stupid, or have to do something monumentally dumb to not look weak. Much like Obama's Syria red line you end up with only bad choices, and Trump's judgement is so lacking that he might make the monumentally dumb choice instead. Well, a second stupid choice, since he made the Jerusalem one first, a decision even GWB baulked at making.

 

Trump admin is the Seymour Skinner of international affairs: Am I out of touch? No, it's everyone else who is wrong!

 

 

Dont forget about those 40 who abstained...

[Malcador]

21 no shows as well, interesting.  Hard to class abstentions as support or opposition, though.

[HoonDing]

WOW, that's a lot of countries to bomb!

[Zoraptor]

 

Who cares what the US and a literal bunch of its colonies think either? Threats and intimidation and 9, nine, votes for. 5% support: how embarrassing.

Apparently everyone else in the world is butthurt over it to the point of wasting time in a non-binding resolution. That will show us!

 

 

In all seriousness, politics is absolutely about 'pointless' posturing. It's wasting time when someone brings a resolution to the UNSC that they know will be vetoed yet it happens rather a lot, and it's mostly the US doing that bit of pointlessness. The whole point is to make Russia or China- or in this case the US- look like Neville No Mates and embarrass them, nothing else is expected.

 

In this case it isn't time wasting though, the UN is founded on the idea that you cannot just conquer bits of other countries any more yet that is exactly what Israel did to get East Jerusalem, and recognising Jerusalem as Israeli capital legitimises that. It's now on the record that the UN still maintains their position, whatever the US says.

 

As for butthurt, you can guarantee the vast majority of those voting for the resolution aren't even slightly butthurt about the US position, since it doesn't directly effect them. Instead they disagree with it since they think it's a dangerous precedent and, well, moronic. Which is completely different from butthurt. Maybe the 40 odd muslim majority countries are butthurt, but that's it. OTOH, Haley and Trump could do with a good dose of Prep H going by their response.

 

21 no shows as well, interesting.  Hard to class abstentions as support or opposition, though.

 

Most of the abstentions were from those who had to take the US threats seriously- like the Baltic States. I haven't checked but I'd bet that Ukraine didn't turn up at all, for example, as they cannot support annexation by force for obvious reasons, but also can't annoy the US. I expect their ambassador got locked in the toilets or had a pressing prior engagement literally anywhere else.

[Zoraptor]

Looks like the separatists have won the Catalonian elections with about the same majority they had previous, so no doubt there will be more fun to be had there as well.

[ShadySands]

snip

Thanks for that. I didn't understand why it was a big deal either.

[Zoraptor]

There is an additional reason why it's a big deal which is related to the annexation/ occupying power stuff, though it isn't directly a matter for the UN per se; the US is meant to be brokering a peace agreement between the Israelis and Palestinians. Realistically that would end with Israel with its capital in Jerusalem anyway and everyone including the Palestinians knows it.

 

All the recognition does with respect to the peace process is to remove leverage against Israel without any concessions granted and make the US look even more biased, while throwing 20 years of negotiations into the bin. Understandably even staunch US allies like the UK are deeply annoyed at that since they've both backed the negotiations wholeheartedly and backed the good faith of the US in those negotiations- to them the US is reneging on commitments and it's a yuge slap in the face. It's a great decision for Israel which now has even less incentive to make concessions, and it's an on the face of it great decision for Trump domestically as the response stokes jingoism and mobilises his base. It just happens to be an awful decision long term and for the US internationally, made worse by the childish threats.

[smjjames]

Looks like the separatists have won the Catalonian elections with about the same majority they had previous, so no doubt there will be more fun to be had there as well.

 

Yep, even though the parliamentary dynamics in Catalonia are a bit different, Spain is right back to square one. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-42450745

[Valsuelm]

"Nothing is immutable."

 

You are correct, mostly.

 

That said, there things as well as scenarios where that thought isn't likely going to get you much.

 

e.g.You're in a car going 120mph towards a cliff that's only 100 yards away, and the car is driven a lunatic who just popped their favorite song on the stereo. After a good amount of contemplating they have become convinced they can fly, convinced the car can fly, and they smile at you gleefully as they rev the car up even more for take off. All the while you sit in the backseat with no doors or windows large enough to jump out of. Up until a few moments ago you thought your friend was only joking when he said he could fly. 'Nothing is immutable' is true, but it's about to visit you in a way you probably wish it wouldn't.

Edited December 22, 2017 by Valsuelm

[Valsuelm]

 

There is some twisted irony that the UK voted yes....

 

One of the very few things that I can put in 'the next dark age isn't almost upon humanity' column, is that much of the world outside of the U.S. does see Israel as the evil it is.

Edited December 22, 2017 by Valsuelm

[Guard Dog]

OK, on the whole Jerusalem thing. I could never be a diplomat because I'm too rooted in reality. Choosing not to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel is just asinine. It is. The President is there, the Knesset is there, the treasury, defense ministry, etc are all there. That sort of makes Jerusalem the capital. Saying it's really in Tel Aviv does not make it so. So, that's that.

 

As not this being an impediment to peace negotiations, how is that going anyway? The US, the UN and others have been trying to broker a permanent peace there since the Six Day War ended. Not going so good is it? At what point do we realize no matter what concessions are offered half the parties (and sometimes ALL the parties) involved are not going to accept it? You know what the definition of insanity is.

 

Israel isn't evil. It's just a country. An artificial made up country that probably should not have been created since it was done so by third parties and at gunpoint. There was a lot of that going on after WWII. Well, you can't put toothpaste back in the tube. It's been 70 years and three major wars. It's not going anywhere. It is going to, like ever country does and should do, act in it's best interest for it's own survival and that of it's citizens. Failure by half the world to "recognize" it did not make it go away. So the whole recognition thing is stupid anyway. The sun didn't set just because you closed your eyes. 

 

Nikki Haley gave a speech at the UN that seems to have pleased a lot of people here. I don't see why. Are we going to kick the UN out of the country? Are we going to withdraw? Are we going to stop footing the bill? No? So that great speech was really just a bunch of BS wasn't it? Bluster without leverage (or at least the willingness to use leverage) is just empty and they all went ahead and condemned us anyway. Our cause would have been better served if she just got up there and read my first three paragraphs of this post. (Nikki if you need a speech writer PM me. My rates are reasonable). 

 

So now we've been "overruled" by the UN. Does that change anything? No. Are we supposed to feel bad or something? If you guys have not figured this out by now let me enlighten you; Americans do not sit around pondering what the rest of the world thinks of what our government, or the rest of us fore that matter, are doing. Usually we don't think of you at all unless we're talking to you or doing business with you or watching you kick our soccer teams ass. We're too busy trying to pay our bills and take care of our families to worry about that crap. 

 

I'd hate for you guys to think I'm telling you the UN is irrelevant. I'd hate that because I'd hope you'd figured that out a long time ago. It's a polite fiction, a lie we all tell ourselves. Wars still happen. Genocide still happens. Human Rights abuses happen and not only does the UN look the other way they put abuses in charge of committees to investigate abuses. Of course it really was conceived as a means to prevent another World War. But I think Robert Oppenheimer and company have done a much better job of that than the UN has. 

 

Just my $.02

Edited December 22, 2017 by Guard Dog

[Guard Dog]

By rooted in reality I was more referring to acknowledging that things that are facts, as facts. Something diplomats don't really do.

[smjjames]

Isn't most of the MidEast made of artificial countries since the boundaries were drawn up to divide up the remains of the Ottoman empire at the end of WWI? At least going by your definition of an artificial country.

 

Anyhow, I agree with Guard Dog here, Israel has done a lot of things that would typically be condemned if done elsewhere, but they aren't evil by any means.

 

As for Jerusalem, there really is no easy solution there. Yes, it's the de-facto capitol of Israel, but it's greatly complicated by the fact that it's the holy city of three major religions and having the mosque on top of what remains of the temple mount definetly doesn't make it any easier.