Rayvin
-
Posts
21205 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
15
Everything posted by Rayvin
-
I noticed McCain has come out and said he'll vote against the introduction of torture. It might not get through Senate, that one.
-
I suppose it does need reporting on. I hope you made the most of the free caviar and champagne that was no doubt on offer.
-
I'm not the one who was at the Davos meeting last week.
-
Well said. I do love your posts.
-
Analysis has been done on this (and I've lamented it previously). If the public are offered policies, the Greens end up in power. At least in this country. The Tories are a distant third or fourth, I think. Well yes but with that comment I was broadly speaking about the people who vote against their own interests out of ignorance. I would still expect the socially conscious to vote against their own interests out of altruism.
-
I've wondered in the past if there should be some manner of mandatory politics test prior to voting. You'd have to write down the policies of various parties and how they would affect you. Something that would force people to consider what they're voting for. Turnout would be like 5% but at least it'd be an informed 5%.
-
Ah but when you start saying that (and I agree with you) then your faith in the whole establishment has to go. You're basically saying democracy doesn't work as it should do and isn't a good method of governance. Which is true, although I concede that it remains perhaps the least bad of all political options - with the exception of a well executed benevolent dictatorship. EDIT - as Meenz says
-
I know what you mean but I can't think of a better word for it. As I say, economic disadvantage is the only thing around which I think leftist populism can build, and if Trump is about to start hoovering that one up, we're stuck with the right wing for the long haul. Presumably until we end up in another global armageddon scenario, or until the next economic collapse.
-
So you're suggesting that people look at something, consider it to be unfair, but vote for it on the basis that they're mean spirited and innately intolerant? That may well be true but it just doesn't sound right to me. If it was, politicians wouldn't need all these narratives that we see trying to manipulate public opinion. Some people probably do vote like that - entirely emotionally. Hell maybe more than I give credit for do. But the swing voters presumably don't. They're looking for the narratives. And they seem to be the ones who act as kingmakers.
-
It'd certainly make identity politics harder, but would be a bit of a shame for social interactions day to day. There's no issue with having identities as long as we're not voting as blocs of identity groups. We're far too easily manipulated when we do, as has been proven repeatedly now. If we're going to group vote at all it should be along the lines of class.
-
I have also read that the wall will be almost impossible to build from an architectural standpoint. Slightly concerned by the 'almost', but even so. Agreed on the estimate, but the more they spend (assuming they have it), the more they'll boost the economy. Still though, I suppose it'll be a hard sell if it looks like Mexico is benefitting, and I guess that works in our favour.
-
All the right has done, both here and in the US, is looked at how miserable people are and given them something to hang onto. The nebulous idea that things can get better if we start looking after our own - and the reason that stuck is because the centre (branded as the left by those on the right) totally and utterly abandoned the people at the bottom. And the actual left was steamrollered by people in the centre who consider it 'unelectable'.
-
Yeah but this guy himself isn't the issue. It's the people out there who digest what they've just seen in that video who are the issue. They're the ones who vote based on what they consider fair and reasoned. And if the left is throwing punches, they're not likely to give our arguments the time of day, are they? The right has been successful by co-opting identity politics. The left used it to get into power, and now the right have done the same thing. It's ridiculous and divisive, and the left shares in the blame for cultivating it as if it was something that would be 'healthy' for society.
-
But as HF has just demonstrated, he can likely raise that money. And it would actually represent a large number of jobs being created. 40,000 or so I just read. Not sure if that's a lot in the overall scheme of things but it looks significant. And that's not taking into account the money working its way through the system and benefiting local economies and so on.
-
That's another good point. Fuck, who'd have thought it. We're going to lose properly. To think that we could have achieved the same things without racist walls and tax breaks for millionaires if they'd gone for Sanders instead of Clinton.
-
So much for the mackem mass voting attempt.
-
Yeah it's a totally pointless battleground actually. No one is seriously suggesting that he be removed from power off the back of the popular vote, so why even bother with it. I've heard some people suggest that all the crazy shit he does like this is just to distract from the damaging things but I don't think he's smart enough for that.
-
Possible. Or maybe it could be used to win compromises on other things at the very least. Like the reintroduction of torture. The thing is though, I don't trust Republicans all that much. I think they could see this as a lasting vote winner as the Democrats will have to campaign each election on the promise of tearing it down.
-
My, that's encouraging. I think he could still be resisted but it would require the left to develop some real intelligence about the matter. The last game in town (in my view) is to attack income inequality and look at economic factors. If Trump goes ahead and corners that one, I um... yeah we probably are fucked.
-
I pulled that figure out of thin air tbf, but yes, you'd hope so. Would they deny him it though?
-
But it's the narrative that matters. As ever. It's the narrative that will allow him to perpetuate further morally repugnant things. His narrative gains in credibility as he succeeds. I just feel like we're playing this wrong. We're staking everything on him being a total fuck up and this wall thing considered as an economic factor is a worry. As is the Dow Jones reaching record levels. What if he isn't a fuck up?
-
This is more encouraging. But even so, that's a lot of investment in the US as well as Mexico, and he'll likely still suggest that it's beneficial. What if the project ends up employing thousands of Americans? Does the incoming president destroy all those jobs? It's potentially a tough one unless we elect a left wing populist. Which we won't do. He is unlikely to get a second term though, agreed there. Not even sure he'll live long enough for one given his age.
-
I do get what you're alluding to - what I'm saying is that our current response to it runs the risk of voiding our credibility. By 'our' I mean civilised, left wing society.
-
Yes but the point is that we seem to be laughing at him for how stupid he is, and yet this fucking wall actually looks like it could be built and lauded as a success. At which point, presumably Trump will be laughing at us.
-
I was thinking about this last night - say it costs $50bn to build the stupid thing. That could be argued to be a Keynesian economic stimulus couldn't it? So we'd have a right wing leader propagating right wing views and getting the desired outcome of an economic boost, job creation and a performing economy. Which will only serve to further legitimise his position.
