The Politics Thread 2019

[Curtains]

1 hour ago, Angry Ram said:

Here we go Brexit morons.. FFS what a melt..

I think the remoaners might be the morons. 

[A Ram for All Seasons]

9 hours ago, maxjam said:

Trump was in part elected because of a kick back against political correctness.

Instead, the people voted for the greatest bullshizzle artist of all time.

[Highgate]

9 hours ago, maxjam said:

Bit of laziness on my behalf not explaining my point more thoroughly.  Trump was in part elected because of a kick back against political correctness - the lurch to the left was already well underway by then on social media and to a slightly lesser degree mainstream media.   I'm not saying it was the only reason Trump was elected but standing up to increasingly oppressive political correctness and removing the political elite played it part.

Since Trump's election however the Democrats (and Labour over here) have embraced this media bubble and lurched further to the left and despite Trump being, well Trump and us having one of the weakest Tory governments in living memory the left can't gain a foothold because they have lost the moderates.

Unless something drastic happens with impeachment which I can't see tbh, I'd say he's nailed on for another win - but time will tell.

I think most people who are feeling threatened by the perceived excessive political correctness in the US are already Republican voters.  Are they more energized because of it?  Possibly, to some extent.  However, I don't think it's an issue that plays a major role in most people's lives and I don't think it was a decisive factor in 2016, nor will it be in 2020.  There have been some stupid moments however, like universities banning controversial speakers just because they don't like what they say.  As long as they are not inciting violence, then everybody has a right to be heard, especially in university where students should have their opinions challenged rather than insulated.  Nevertheless, certain sections of the media as well as social media blow these issues out of proportion.  Healthcare and the Economy will dwarf 'political correctness' as an issue in the 2020 election.  Tragically the environment is still not getting the top billing it deserves.

I agree with you, Trump will surely be impeached, but it won't have any effect on his candidacy as the Senate won't remove him from office.  That's unless, as you say something drastic happens, like for example if Giuliani is forced to testify.  Rudy is well capable of incriminating himself, Trump and anyone else he knows without even realizing it. 

But I don't see how you reach the conclusion that Trump is 'nailed on' to win.  As of today Trump national approval rating is 41.6%, compared to a 53.4% disapproval rating. Even with the US's bizarre electoral system Trump still has a lot to do to get re-elected. Nearly all political analysts think it's too close to call yet.  If you really are convinced Trump will win...head down to the bookies..they are all giving better than even money on a Trump victory in 2020. 

 

[Stive Pesley]

12 hours ago, maxjam said:

I think society is in a strange place at the moment conversations need to be had and decisions need to be made. 

Decisions? Do you mean people need to decide who it is OK to repress and in what circumstances?

The problem I have with your train of thought is that, for all you rail against "political correctness" and "SJWs",   it sounds like you just want to get to a point where society thinks exactly like you do. Two sides of the same coin

[Angry Ram]

5 minutes ago, SchtivePesley said:

Decisions? Do you mean people need to decide who it is OK to repress and in what circumstances?

The problem I have with your train of thought is that, for all you rail against "political correctness" and "SJWs",   it sounds like you just want to get to a point where society thinks exactly like you do. Two sides of the same coin

The problem happens when ‘both’ sides get too extreme and try and impose their ideology on the other and attach labels to unbelievers.  We have already seen ‘morons’ banded about, racist, facist.. Minority’s should be heard but not dictate.

[Curtains]

Has Sturgeons 2nd Scottish independence referendum been cast aside by Corbyn yet. 

 

[Gritstone Ram]

2 hours ago, Pastinaak said:

*brexit party - not brexit. I'm not a remainer but I can't stand the brexit party.

If you vote for Sarah your vote won’t be wasted after all.

[maxjam]

1 hour ago, SchtivePesley said:

Decisions? Do you mean people need to decide who it is OK to repress and in what circumstances?

I mean there are issues generally championed by the left that are no-go that if you raise a quizical voice you are automatically cast aside as '...phobic'.

Want to raise concerns about Islam?  You are automatically Islamophobic.  Want to raise concerns about kids being taught 100 genders in school or pervasive trans rights.  You transphobe!  There are a number of  issues that have been hijacked by SJWs and taken to the nth degree that we haven't decided upon as a society yet whether they should be - and only one side of the argument is being allowed to speak.

Furthermore, as SJW groups become more active and vocal they will inevitably come into contact with each other.  The Muslim schools/LGBT agenda is an example of this - which minority group will emerge victorious and which will have to bend the knee?  The two don't mix.  Other than a few very safe articles the media have been largely silent on this matter, yet they are eager to throw their weight behind virtually every other LGBT cause or take down individuals for anti-LGBT comments whether done purposefully, by accident or 10 years ago.

 

1 hour ago, SchtivePesley said:

The problem I have with your train of thought is that, for all you rail against "political correctness" and "SJWs",   it sounds like you just want to get to a point where society thinks exactly like you do. Two sides of the same coin

Nope, I want all sides of arguments to be given platforms to state their case, not give one side a free pass whilst restricting the other.  As I said before society has to work for everyone not just [insert minorty group here] and its not just a case of bowing to the masses, it is also a case of minority group A learning to live with and accept minorty group B.

[Comrade 86]

15 minutes ago, maxjam said:

Nope, I want all sides of arguments to be given platforms to state their case, not give one side a free pass whilst restricting the other.  As I said before society has to work for everyone not just [insert minorty group here] and its not just a case of bowing to the masses, its also a case of minority group A learning to live with and accept minorty group B.

Best lead by example then and stop labelling those whose concerns matter less to you as SJWs and the like. 

[maxjam]

1 hour ago, Highgate said:

I think most people who are feeling threatened by the perceived excessive political correctness in the US are already Republican voters.  Are they more energized because of it?  Possibly, to some extent.  However, I don't think it's an issue that plays a major role in most people's lives and I don't think it was a decisive factor in 2016, nor will it be in 2020.  There have been some stupid moments however, like universities banning controversial speakers just because they don't like what they say.  As long as they are not inciting violence, then everybody has a right to be heard, especially in university where students should have their opinions challenged rather than insulated.  Nevertheless, certain sections of the media as well as social media blow these issues out of proportion.  Healthcare and the Economy will dwarf 'political correctness' as an issue in the 2020 election.  Tragically the environment is still not getting the top billing it deserves.

I agree with you, Trump will surely be impeached, but it won't have any effect on his candidacy as the Senate won't remove him from office.  That's unless, as you say something drastic happens, like for example if Giuliani is forced to testify.  Rudy is well capable of incriminating himself, Trump and anyone else he knows without even realizing it. 

But I don't see how you reach the conclusion that Trump is 'nailed on' to win.  As of today Trump national approval rating is 41.6%, compared to a 53.4% disapproval rating. Even with the US's bizarre electoral system Trump still has a lot to do to get re-elected. Nearly all political analysts think it's too close to call yet.  If you really are convinced Trump will win...head down to the bookies..they are all giving better than even money on a Trump victory in 2020. 

 

A couple of interesting articles here;

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/aug/01/democrats-progressive-moderate-strategy

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/23/democrats-shouldnt-move-too-far-left-obama

[Highgate]

15 minutes ago, maxjam said:

A couple of interesting articles here;

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/aug/01/democrats-progressive-moderate-strategy

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/23/democrats-shouldnt-move-too-far-left-obama

Definitely quite a lot of polarization in the Democratic Party right now.  I just hope the Democratic electorate in the Primaries vote for the candidate that they would like to see as President and not try to predict who has the best chance of defeating Trump.  Nobody knows that yet, so there is little point in such 'tactical' voting.  Plus voting for the candidate whose policies you like the most is what Democracy should be all about as far as I'm concerned.

[Stive Pesley]

55 minutes ago, maxjam said:

if you raise a quizical voice you are automatically cast aside as '...phobic'.

Nope - not cast aside, just asked to be accountable for what you are saying. I've seen you make valid arguments on here which don't make you x-phobic, but then I've also seen you make some that (in my opinion) bear deeper scrutiny.

 

56 minutes ago, maxjam said:

Nope, I want all sides of arguments to be given platforms to state their case

Don't you see how incompatible your argument here is? You already have a platform to state your case. and if you're willing that to be open to both sides then you will get scrutiny. You just need to have the courage of your convictions to argue your side more robustly and without any prejudice

A lot of the time -what the free-speech brigade are arguing for is to not be challenged when they make a statement on a minority group

The whole "i can't even say z without being accused of x" nonsense. So what? Deal with the accusation. 

Isn't that what your fair/both sides platform has to be based on?

[maxjam]

13 minutes ago, SchtivePesley said:

Nope - not cast aside, just asked to be accountable for what you are saying. I've seen you make valid arguments on here which don't make you x-phobic, but then I've also seen you make some that (in my opinion) bear deeper scrutiny.

 

Don't you see how incompatible your argument here is? You already have a platform to state your case. and if you're willing that to be open to both sides then you will get scrutiny. You just need to have the courage of your convictions to argue your side more robustly and without any prejudice

A lot of the time -what the free-speech brigade are arguing for is to not be challenged when they make a statement on a minority group

The whole "i can't even say z without being accused of x" nonsense. So what? Deal with the accusation. 

Isn't that what your fair/both sides platform has to be based on?

Well we'll just have to agree to disagree on that.  There have been numerous times in this thread and several posts have been removed for people throwing the word facist about when they disagree with others views - debate is good shutting down debate is bad.

Debate on social media is being clamped down on, even main stream media take a highly selective view.  There are numerous articles about this, I just picked a random one;

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/08/27/transgender-activists-accused-attempting-shut-downdebate/

[maxjam]

26 minutes ago, Highgate said:

Definitely quite a lot of polarization in the Democratic Party right now.  I just hope the Democratic electorate in the Primaries vote for the candidate that they would like to see as President and not try to predict who has the best chance of defeating Trump.  Nobody knows that yet, so there is little point in such 'tactical' voting.  Plus voting for the candidate whose policies you like the most is what Democracy should be all about as far as I'm concerned.

In an ideal world (maybe one with PR) I'd agree but in a 2 party system if you lose your moderates you hand victory to your opponent. 

[Norman]

2 hours ago, Curtains said:

Has Sturgeons 2nd Scottish independence referendum been cast aside by Corbyn yet. 

 

Seems it has been cast aside by the Scottish people if recent polls are to be believed. Even with a Conservative Party and therefore a version of Brexit looming here. 

Another reason to chalk off the list for remaining in the EU: breakup of the home nations. 

[rynny]

?‍♂️

 

[GenBr]

13 hours ago, GboroRam said:

What is left wing? 

To me it's public ownership and workers' rights. 

That's not Hillary or the Democrats 

 

Neither of the main American political parties are left wing by European standards. The Democrats are just slightly left of the Republicans, but both are centre right. Anything actually left wing would be accused of being Communist.

 

3 hours ago, A Ram for All Seasons said:

Instead, the people voted for the greatest bullshizzle artist of all time.

Lets be honest here - Hilary was also an awful choice. At least Trump provides some comedic value for the rest of the world.

[Sith Happens]

12 minutes ago, rynny said:

?‍♂️

 

Clearly thinks he is saying the right thing, but clearly out of touch. 

No issue with someone targetting pay day loan companies but you have to be intelligent enough to word it properly.

He probably isn't wrong that some people struggle with managing budgets but if he thinks better management of personal budgets is the one thing that solves poverty and the need for food banks then he is isn't fit to be an MP.

For every person who is not managing their own budget their will be multiple people with no budget to manage.

 

[Van der MoodHoover]

13 minutes ago, Paul71 said:

Clearly thinks he is saying the right thing, but clearly out of touch. 

No issue with someone targetting pay day loan companies but you have to be intelligent enough to word it properly.

He probably isn't wrong that some people struggle with managing budgets but if he thinks better management of personal budgets is the one thing that solves poverty and the need for food banks then he is isn't fit to be an MP.

For every person who is not managing their own budget their will be multiple people with no budget to manage.

 

And many more "jams" whose budgets are so precarious they have no contingency in them at all should anything go wrong. Like the TV ad which features what looks like a reasonably affluent working mum just about to head out in her car when the news breaks of a boiler breakdown - which prompts the thought of a payday loan.

If that is widespread then its a terrible indictment of our society that we have created the conditions for people to live with so much stress.

[Highgate]

53 minutes ago, maxjam said:

In an ideal world (maybe one with PR) I'd agree but in a 2 party system if you lose your moderates you hand victory to your opponent. 

Or maybe by not energizing your base you hand victory to your opponent. In 2016 Hillary was a moderate and she did worse than expected. Trump lurched to the right (even by Republican standards) and he did better than expected. So the best strategy is not actually easy to determine.