• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair

Status
Not open for further replies.
H

habithipster

Member
pigeon said:
One possible consideration, from my perspective, is to look at the Magnitsky Act more carefully. That clearly seemed to excite a meaningful response from Putin, possibly because it wasn't a sanction on Russia but a sanction directly on Putin and the oligarchs that run Russia. Maybe we need more targeted efforts to accomplish our goal, since Putin is not really answerable to Russia.
Click to expand...

As if this isn't exactly what they're doing.
 
G

Glix

Member
PBY said:
But Dems haven't really produced a plan that gets us there, would you agree?
Click to expand...

Diblasio is trying locally at least!

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/06/nyregion/bill-de-blasio-will-push-for-tax-on-wealthy-to-fix-subway.html

http://nypost.com/2017/08/07/de-blasio-says-rich-people-wont-miss-subway-tax-money-because-theyre-so-rich/

Originally Posted by pigeon

One possible consideration, from my perspective, is to look at the Magnitsky Act more carefully. That clearly seemed to excite a meaningful response from Putin, possibly because it wasn't a sanction on Russia but a sanction directly on Putin and the oligarchs that run Russia. Maybe we need more targeted efforts to accomplish our goal, since Putin is not really answerable to Russia.
Click to expand...

Yes, the reason that they are more crazy about the magnitsky act compared with everything else is because it prevents them from moving their ill gotten gains out of Russia. 100%. They could give two shits about the rest of the citizens.
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
pigeon said:
So I've heard this argument before and I do think it's worth considering, although I think you leave out a pretty relevant aspect of the argument, which is that these countries also don't actually have democratic franchise with which to express dissatisfaction with the regime.
Click to expand...

I do think this is an additional factor, but even if they had a more democratic franchise, it would be irrelevant if people increase support for a strongman in response to sanctions, since the strongman would then get more votes, which is more entrenchment. Obviously there are complications which I'll discuss below with respect to your next point, but the broad argument is the same.

I think our goal is pretty clear -- this is an iterative game, we want to make sure Putin's payoff from his choice is sufficiently negative to deter not just him but all other actors from interfering with American elections in the future. Traditionally we've done this by launching unnecessary wars on third parties. Sanctions are a nice step upwards from that strategy. If they're not effective, where do we go from there? I don't consider "just hope it doesn't happen again" to be a real answer.
Click to expand...

Sanctions aren't a step upwards, though. That's the whole reason I'm having this discussion with you. The evidence bears out that they're a step backwards.

There are limited situations where it can work - if a country has at least limited democratic organs, and if there is an opposition party which is not totally discredited, and if the opposition party can convince people the strongman is to blame, then you can help mobilize support for the opposition party. This is a rough description of what happened in Iran, Rhodesia, and South Africa.

However, this is definitely not an apt description of Russia.

One possible consideration, from my perspective, is to look at the Magnitsky Act more carefully. That clearly seemed to excite a meaningful response from Putin, possibly because it wasn't a sanction on Russia but a sanction directly on Putin and the oligarchs that run Russia. Maybe we need more targeted efforts to accomplish our goal, since Putin is not really answerable to Russia.
Click to expand...

This is what I am arguing for, yes.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
Crab said:
I do think this is an additional factor, but even if they had a more democratic franchise, it would be irrelevant if people increase support for a strongman in response to sanctions, since the strongman would then get more votes, which is more entrenchment. Obviously there are complications which I'll discuss below with respect to your next point, but the broad argument is the same.



Sanctions aren't a step upwards, though. That's the whole reason I'm having this discussion with you. The evidence bears out that they're a step backwards.

There are limited situations where it can work - if a country has at least limited democratic organs, and if there is an opposition party which is not totally discredited, and if the opposition party can convince people the strongman is to blame, then you can help mobilize support for the opposition party. This is a rough description of what happened in Iran, Rhodesia, and South Africa.

However, this is definitely not an apt description of Russia.



This is what I am arguing for, yes.
Click to expand...

I meant they're a step upwards from invading Iraq again. Hopefully we can reach an accord on this at least.
 
Futurematic

Futurematic

Member
RustyNails said:
Blumenthal is on the Senate Russia panel investigating Trump, and he was on a Sunday talk show this weekend. Guess who was sitting in his underwear in bedminster, NJ watching fake news over the weekend.
Click to expand...

It's about NYC real estate. Because of course it is.

Perhaps more importantly, both are central figures in families that have amassed enormous fortunes in the world of prestige Manhattan real estate. For many years, Trump’s principal competitors included enterprises controlled by Peter Malkin, whose daughter Cynthia has been married to Blumenthal for 35 years. (Her riches have made him one of the dozen richest members of Congress every year since his arrival, with a minimum net worth of $67 million as he cruised to re-election last year.)
Click to expand...
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
DonShula said:
So, me being a bit simple, am I to read this as GOP health care bill opponents being punished for their opposition?
Click to expand...
Probably. I'd imagine Collins' overall approval rating is still quite high, though.

If I were her I'd be getting ready to run for governor as an independent, if that's truly what she wants to do.
 
H

habithipster

Member
Crab said:
I do think this is an additional factor, but even if they had a more democratic franchise, it would be irrelevant if people increase support for a strongman in response to sanctions, since the strongman would then get more votes, which is more entrenchment. Obviously there are complications which I'll discuss below with respect to your next point, but the broad argument is the same.
Click to expand...

More drivel.

Crab said:
Sanctions aren't a step upwards, though. That's the whole reason I'm having this discussion with you. The evidence bears out that they're a step backwards.
Click to expand...

Please link that evidence.

This is what I am arguing for, yes.
Click to expand...

Pft.
 
C

chadskin

Member
The bill allows for targeted sanctions on Russian individuals in Putin's circles, it's up to the implementation:

The Russian sanctions will target people and entities that:

-- undermine US cybersecurity on behalf of the Russia government
-- invest certain amounts in Russia's energy export pipelines
-- conduct "significant" transactions with Russian defense and intelligence agencies (though this will come into effect six months from now)
-- commit, or assist in, serious human rights abuses
-- commit acts of "significant" corruption
-- provide support to the Syrian government to acquire arms
-- invest, or facilitate the investment of, $10 million or more in the Russian government's privatization of any state-owned asset in a one-year period that could unfairly benefit government officials or their associates.

The bill lists 12 types of sanctions that can be imposed and obliges the President to use at least five in many cases against those affected. They can include freezing assets, such as property, revoking US visas and banning exports from the United States to those sanctioned.
Click to expand...
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/07/25/europe/russia-sanctions-explainer/index.html
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
pigeon said:
I meant they're a step upwards from invading Iraq again. Hopefully we can reach an accord on this at least.
Click to expand...

On the topic of Iraq, did you ever read much about the Iraq sanctions in the early '90s?
 
P

PBY

Banned
Nordicus said:
It takes more to "point out bullshit" than shitposts so short that Trump takes it as light reading
Click to expand...

I'm just going to keep it moving. People in this thread have posted really smart stuff here in the past regarding the use of sanctions and how they can / should be deployed.
 
A

aspiegamer

Member
North Korea is the weirdest damn thing. They're pathetic and non-threatening on the surface. People laugh at their leadership and their claims of power. We follow this process for 60+ years, and now they maybe maybe might have some kind of marginal threat against the US that might maybe at some point work... If they ever chose to use it which they probably wouldn't.

It's extremely difficult to feel concerned in a situation like this, but there's surely a line somewhere at some point where people might actually feel threatened? No one actually wants a war. Not NK, not anyone! Not sure how well you can sell a conflict to Americans where it's the equivalent of an NFL team playing a JV high school squad which I guess might have a 1:1000 chance of returning the opening kickoff for a touchdown and trying to hype that as a game we should care about.

I have no idea what happens next. They could test-fire a missile and land it 2 miles off the coast of California and everyone would still laugh and shrug it off because, lol, it's just North Korea and we'd feel like bastards for beating up a special needs child.
 
D

Diablos

Member
Aaron Strife said:
Collins only has 33% approval with Republican primary voters.

http://www.politico.com/tipsheets/m...oks-fights-to-stay-relevant-in-alabama-221762

Northam leads 42-37, Fairfax 43-38 for Lt. Gov, Herring 45-39 for Attorney General.

http://www.wilder.vcu.edu/news-and-...eads-in-all-three-upcoming-statewide-ele.html

And perennial loser Danny Tarkanian is challenging Dean Heller in the Republican primary

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/345697-dean-heller-draws-gop-challenger-in-nevada
Click to expand...
Collins should just run as an independent -- if she runs again
 
F

Fenderputty

Banned
aspiegamer said:
North Korea is the weirdest damn thing. They're pathetic and non-threatening on the surface. People laugh at their leadership and their claims of power. We follow this process for 60+ years, and now they maybe maybe might have some kind of marginal threat against the US that might maybe at some point work... If they ever chose to use it which they probably wouldn't.

It's extremely difficult to feel concerned in a situation like this, but there's surely a line somewhere at some point where people might actually feel threatened? No one actually wants a war. Not NK, not anyone! Not sure how well you can sell a conflict to Americans where it's the equivalent of an NFL team playing a JV high school squad which I guess might have a 1:1000 chance of returning the opening kickoff for a touchdown and trying to hype that as a game we should care about.

I have no idea what happens next. They could test-fire a missile and land it 2 miles off the coast of California and everyone would still laugh and shrug it off because, lol, it's just North Korea and we'd feel like bastards for beating up a special needs child.
Click to expand...

We have drawn a line. We've just not done anything but sanctions to try and stop them from crossing. Which they have. Repeatedly now. I'm assuming we're still in a stage where some mild egg on our face is better than the alternative. Probably both political and practical.

Also your characterization of a conflict doesn't feel accurate (NFL vs JV). Our technology would make theirs look ancient, but unless we avoid all land conflict (we won't) lots of lives will be lost. Not just our lives too but that of our allies.

We're just tired of conflict. It's been a constant for over a decade now.
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
My ideal timeline is that Democrats pick off Heller, Flake and Cruz, win McCain's seat in a special election, Collins becomes governor and appoints a left-leaning Indy in her seat (Eliot Cutler maybe), Murkowski becomes an Independent caucusing with the Democrats.
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
A

aspiegamer

Member
Fenderputty said:
Also your characterization of a conflict doesn't feel accurate (NFL vs JV). Our technology would make theirs look ancient, but unless we avoid all land conflict (we won't) lots of lives will be lost. Not just our lives too but that of our allies.

We're just tired of conflict. It's been a constant for over a decade now.
Click to expand...
I'll clarify... NFL vs JV is the comparison of US to NK. Not the NK threat in total, which is extremely real to anyone living near the DMZ and would be deadly for any local force attempting a ground war in an attempt at immediate retaliation. Not being a threat to the US (the physical country, directly) is what matters most to Americans who would need to be 100% sold on the idea of a war, thus I gave that analogy.

North Korea isn't going to nuke anyone because they're entirely aware they they'd be wiped off the face of the planet if they did. No one is going to attack North Korea because anything within 50 miles of the DMZ could be completely destroyed. This is, sadly, how nuclear deterrence is "supposed" to work.
 
J

jtb

Banned
Aaron Strife said:
My ideal timeline is that Democrats pick off Heller, Flake and Cruz, win McCain's seat in a special election, Collins becomes governor and appoints a left-leaning Indy in her seat (Eliot Cutler maybe), Murkowski becomes an Independent caucusing with the Democrats.
Click to expand...

What are Corker's approvals? Let's wheel Harold Ford out of whatever awful finance monstrosity he works for and run it back like it's 2006.
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
jtb said:
What are Corker's approvals? Let's wheel Harold Ford out of whatever awful finance monstrosity he works for and run it back like it's 2006.
Click to expand...
06 was realistically our last chance at winning Tennessee, although we should still find a decent candidate.

Ford also tried running for the New York Senate seat like four years later lol.
 
N

NeoXChaos

Member
"Today, Republicans don't even need to win any 'swing states' to win a Senate majority. The Congressional Map Has A Record-Setting Bias Against Democrats "

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-congressional-map-is-historically-biased-toward-the-gop/

But a look at the map reveals that the Democrats hold far more seats on borrowed time than Republicans do. The GOP doesn't hold a single Senate seat in those 14 states that are more Democratic-leaning than the country overall. Meanwhile, Democrats hold six seats in the 26 more-Republican-than-average states, and all six are at risk in 2018.
Click to expand...

Meanwhile, all Republicans would need to obtain 60 seats would be to win every seat in the 30 states that Trump won — no Clinton states needed. That's a plausible outcome over a few election cycles, thanks to today's extraordinarily high rates of straight-ticket voting — if the basic contours of the nation's political geography don't drastically change in the next decade.
Click to expand...

We are going to have to get rid of the filibuster next time we control. We could be locked out the Senate for years to come.
 
S

ShadowSwordmaster

Banned
NeoXChaos said:
"Today, Republicans don’t even need to win any 'swing states' to win a Senate majority. The Congressional Map Has A Record-Setting Bias Against Democrats "

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-congressional-map-is-historically-biased-toward-the-gop/





We are going to have to get rid of the filibuster next time we control. We could be locked out the Senate for years to come.
Click to expand...
image.php
 
K

kirblar

Member
I think Presidential pendulum swings and the nature of statewide elections will make this a potential problem rather than an actual problem.

The senate will always be more conservative due to this, and of course the Fillibuster needs to die.
 
P

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
K

Kusagari

Member
I mean that situation seems pretty obvious when you think about. We have multiple seats in states Trump won by more than 20 points. Even if Manchin, Heitkamp, etc. hold on in 2018, it's a coalition living on borrowed time. We just need it to hold on until AZ, TX and GA swing more blue.

Obviously though, getting 60 in this climate will be basically impossible. Faced with an obstinate GOP, we need to nuke the filibuster.
 
J

Joe Shlabotnik

Banned
To be honest, getting a folder full of positive news about yourself twice a day would be a really beneficial self-affirmation exercise for many people

Just not the one person who's actually getting it
 
T

tedrotheredro

Member
Wonder what Trump is talking about today...

Jim Acosta @Acosta

Trump: North Korea "best not make any more threats to the U.S. They will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen." per pool

Jennifer Jacobs @JenniferJJacobs

Trump says to prevent opioid overdoses, tell youths "no good, really bad for you." "If they don't start it'll never be a problem."
Click to expand...

I just can't...let me off this ride.
 
A

avaya

Member
The problem with the Magnitsky Act is that the treasury does not enforce it. Those on the current list use nominees to skirt the impact. Adding more people to the list should absolutely be done, by definition though adding someone like Fridmanm who is incredibly corrupt, risks business relationships with legitimate western firms. Taking it all the way out to the 1,000 top Russians would become equivalent to banning all trade with Russia.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

your favorite racing games by year (2002-2022)
2
72
4K
marcincz replied
Show us your gaming setup: 2025 Edition
2 3
106
9K
Mr Hyde replied
[GfK data] In the UK, Xbox Series S and X has now overtaken sales of the original Xbox. PS5 is now closing in on 3DS/2DS sales.
Sales-Age 2
51
6K
Thirty7ven replied
The "I survived development hell" club (7 years+) of games (2024 edition)
36
3K
Holammer replied
Show us your gaming setup: 2024 Edition
2 3 4 5 6
263
52K
Topher replied
Top Bottom