ShadowSwordmaster
Banned
Thanks.
-
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
- Thread starter aspiegamer
- Start date
- Status
Thanks.
TumblingHippo
Member
How long before DADT comes back?
I genuinely wish it didn't always feel like things are gonna get worse.
I genuinely wish it didn't always feel like things are gonna get worse.
So Trump announced a change in who can serve in the military over Twitter?
I could see arguments about transgender individuals not being fit for combat, since most of the treatments and operations leave their bodies in an odd state of physical strength (If memory serves me, some of the procedures permanently reduce bone strength for example), but this is a pretty nuanced issue where Twitter is really not the place to announce it and explain the rational. This is something where I would give the Military the benefit of the doubt to at least here out their specific reasoning in detail for change in policy before saying this is just them being hateful or ignorant.
I could see arguments about transgender individuals not being fit for combat, since most of the treatments and operations leave their bodies in an odd state of physical strength (If memory serves me, some of the procedures permanently reduce bone strength for example), but this is a pretty nuanced issue where Twitter is really not the place to announce it and explain the rational. This is something where I would give the Military the benefit of the doubt to at least here out their specific reasoning in detail for change in policy before saying this is just them being hateful or ignorant.
Not true - I think the policy positions I support are the best way forward, but I'm open to reconsider my stances if we have sufficient data/support telling us what the base wants.
I do know that voters do want to vote for something concrete - give people something to vote FOR, not just charisma or amorphous concepts.
The military banned black people and women for years. Why should they get the benefit of the doubt?
BoogieWoogie
Banned
What the fuck....
benicillin
Banned
Studies have shown that trans soldiers are entirely fit for combat and no army that has allowed trans soldiers to serve has ever had any problems because of it. Our own army has clearly come to that conclusion considering there are thousands openly serving right now.
Do you have any support for this?
The military were apparently blindsided though.
And to make it out as a cost issue when you blow hundreds of billions a year into a dysfunctional and corrupt apparatus is a pretty hard sell.
Resident_UA
Member
The more I think about this whole Trump becoming a president thing the better I feel about it. I think if Hillary won we would have Trump News Network and Bernie Bros swaying public opinion for the next few decades. In the scenario where Trump won I'm still expecting this whole populism bullshit to be over in 3 years. How much longer can American public handle this insanity?
Can you articulate, specifically, what you dislike about populism? And further, articulate what you mean by "populism"?
Single payer is populist.
Increasing the minimum wage is populist.
Are you against the above?
Too bad the military doesn't have some kind of basic training and medical evaluation process to determine whether or not individuals are fit to serve.
Ok, I must just be ignorant in the matter, and recalling old and incorrect information.
skullmuffins
Banned
Shao Kahn on the Lawn
Member
Populism relies upon appealing to ordinary people and ordinary people don't like being told about tough realities.
Take Bernie's single-payer plan for instance. The populist rhetoric is that we can tax the rich and pay for such a plan: the reality is that everyone's taxes need to go up in order to facilitate such a thing (Which I'm in favor of, but I'm a minority in this regard).
Trump's "proposal", if you can call it that, was equally unrealistic. The idea that we can cover everyone, have protection for preexisting conditions, lower deductibles, lower premiums, reduce the deficit, and not force people to purchase with a mandate was a fiction that made people happy that is completely divorced from reality.
People don't want to hear that they've got to sacrifice something to get something: they want to be told that they can have everything they want and that it won't personally cost them a dime. The United States has a serious, multi-generational problem in that the notion that taxes can only go in one direction has become part of the zeitgeist.
Resident_UA
Member
I'm for both. But these won't happen in the next decade or so. So you can lie to people and say that these will happen (like Trump lied about pretty much about everything), but as of now these are just populist ideas that have no basis in reality.
EDIT: Single great example. Single payer will not happen overnight, BUT you can push for Public Option that will eventually force insurance companies to focus on Supplemental insurance and Single payer will become reality.
Heaven forbid someone take a job for the benefits. Better kick out all those soldiers who join for scholarships, the immigrants who join for expedited citizenship or even the sailors who just want to travel
Every comment section reverts to Twitch chat as soon as trans people are involved.
"Populism" is also rural and majoritarian and involves railing against urban "elites." Which is why you get all that fun racism, sexism and other fun stuff frequently mixed in.
benicillin
Banned
I'd love to hear an explanation on Mattis being consulted on this and why he thinks its acceptable when the military, as a whole, hasn't seen any problems with openly serving trans members.
Fuck this whole administration.
Fuck this whole administration.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
A populist movement is one which claims to represent the interests of 'the people' against the interests of an opposed 'elite'.
Right now, Donald Trump is the elite, and he pretty definitely has opposed interests to most Americans. On both moral and pragmatic grounds, any opposition movement ought to be representing all of those Americans he intends to screw over - that is, they ought to be populist.
If the Democrats aren't populist right now, they're nothing.
Right now, Donald Trump is the elite, and he pretty definitely has opposed interests to most Americans. On both moral and pragmatic grounds, any opposition movement ought to be representing all of those Americans he intends to screw over - that is, they ought to be populist.
If the Democrats aren't populist right now, they're nothing.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Yeah we need to stop treating populism as an inherently good thing, it's a fairly nebulous concept. Trump ran a populist campaign, Sanders ran a populist campaign. The difference is the former appealed to peoples' darkest nature while the latter used that to push economic progressivism.
I have to imagine Trump came out with the trans order today to get the media talking about something else for once, but I never want to hear someone claim that Trump is ambivalent towards LGBT issues and I myself have been guilty of that. I just never thought he'd actually go there. This does take the wind out of the sails of the "but if we impeach Trump then we have Pence and he'd be MUCH worse!" argument.
I have to imagine Trump came out with the trans order today to get the media talking about something else for once, but I never want to hear someone claim that Trump is ambivalent towards LGBT issues and I myself have been guilty of that. I just never thought he'd actually go there. This does take the wind out of the sails of the "but if we impeach Trump then we have Pence and he'd be MUCH worse!" argument.
nature boy
Member
Wanna see some Maverickism
Exactly. Those policies are "populist" but, "populism" can encompass a shitload of things.
Which is why I asked him to define what he meant by "populism."
Resident_UA
Member
That's exactly why so many people are calling Democrats weak (even on GAF)
BUT I'm actually OK with what Democrats are doing. They are basically waiting this out and hoping for sanity to return to politics. Not a wise bet, but if this whole thing remains this insane we might as well just turn politics into sport, because nothing will matter.
That's exactly why so many people are calling Democrats weak (even on GAF)
BUT I'm actually OK with what Democrats are doing. They are basically waiting this out and hoping for sanity to return to politics. Not a wise bet, but if this whole thing remains this insane we might as well just turn politics into sport, because nothing will matter.
Why do you assume that populism is insane though? I think you're conflating aspects of populism with things you don't like in politics generally, which I don't think is the case wholesale.
How can you look at something like this and not just assume that populism will continue?
Aaron Strife
Banned
McCain: "We need to return to regular order"
Democrats: "We have an amendment that would return this to regular order"
McCain: "NOOOOOOO"
I just want god to blow in the cartridge first.
You're inadvertently pointing out the pendulum in the room and why Trump could get away with spouting populist BS all campaign long as he didn't have a record.
Obama lied his ass off on that front as well in 08 in the primaries.
This too.
Every out of power party rails against 'the establishment' because the establishment is the incumbent. Why I find the label of 'populism' to largely be meaningless at this point.
If this were true, the platform that Bernie Sanders had unprecedented control over would have been more than enough to turn out voters.
The only uncharismatic nerd to win an election recently was HW Bush, and he later lost to a more charismatic Bill Clinton.
In a GE, policy matters, but not if your candidate doesn't have the charisma to sell it.
Facebook broke the reset button, unfortunately.
Resident_UA
Member
If there are just populist ideas on both sides with no downside then Politics are just pure insanity. You will end up politicians promising bullshit on both sides, never delivering, but still having 35% support among their group because they are on the SAME TEAM. That's why it's a sports analogy.
EDIT: your graph. I'm hoping it won't continue, but honestly I don't know what the good solution is... Taxes won't necessarily solve anything (too many loopholes + becoming rich will never be easy). Do you know what good solution is? I would actually start with education and turning school system into federally financed institution. I think that would make the most impact... Flat tax could help...
But what does that have to do with populism? I don't really get the connection with populism and the teams analogy.
I think that as long as income inequality and social inequity continue at the rate we're on, both sides of the political spectrum will lash out to address these problems in ways that reflect their ideologies. I think that to fix that, you have to fix the underlying problems - which won't go away by just waiting it out.
nature boy
Member
(Party ID)
Party of freedom indeed.
Resident_UA
Member
Populism in this scenario is just telling people what they want to hear. That's it. There's nothing else to it. It's not very complex. Comment below about your graph.
EDIT: your graph. I'm hoping it won't continue, but honestly I don't know what the good solution is... Taxes won't necessarily solve anything (too many loopholes + becoming rich will never be easy). Do you know what good solution is? I would actually start with education and turning school system into federally financed institution. I think that would make the most impact... Flat tax could help...
Minimum wage hikes, increasing taxation, attention to corporate consolidation, regulating our financial system, providing college and healthcare for all, fixing our justice system so that it works for all people, not just white people, etc.
Joe Shlabotnik
Banned
McCain told Murkowski she "did the right thing" voting against the BCRA.
...
...
- Status