• 0 Posts
  • 522 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 29th, 2023

help-circle
  • The Democratic platform is really quite leftwing. It contains things like increasing the minimum wage, getting money out of politics etc etc. The problem is in how they run campaigns. The role of consultants is far too big, and this lets the GOP set the agenda.

    Example: The GOP talks about the border constantly->media reports on the border-> voters in focus groups report caring deeply about the border->Dems campaign on the border (arguably their weakest point).

    If Kamala had campaigned heavily on healthcare (say expanding Medicare), she could have shifted part of the focus away from the border and towards healthcare (the GOPs weakest point), which shifts the momentum.

    The same happened with many other topics. The campaign talked about the economy (whatever that means, but somehow voters associate this with GOP), rather than raising minimum wages or building homes (a strength of Dems). Climate change was never even mentioned throughout the campaign.

    Dems have to find a way to lead the conversation, rather than follow a conversation set by the GOP or they will never win.


  • You ask for a concrete action when we are no more than 16 days in. Ok let’s ignore that and pretend you are acting in good faith.

    1. Weapon shipments that had been blocked have been released
    2. After the Gaza ceasefire Israel has opened an offensive on the Westbank
    3. Words of a US president have a meaning if they are not directly felt on the ground. For instance, Trump has made it clear today that he will not oppose an ethnic cleansing operation in Gaza (and likely the same for the Westbank).

    Let me ask you a question in return. It is my impression that you suffer from confirmation bias where you sat out the election because both sides were equally bad. I therefore think it would be good for you if you set a threshold. At what point will you accept that Trump is really worse than Kamala would have been?







  • I agree in principle, but in practice it’s tricky. You must have courts that are strong enough to throw out election results if foreign interference can be proven. This has recently happened in Romania, but there are also many examples in which these laws were meaningless. The US is the obvious case where the 2016 election result should have been thrown out, but nothing happened. For the Brexit vote I think some pretty meaningless fines were handed out.

    Another question is what should happen with foreign interference that is not financial in nature. For instance, Musk speaking at AFD, or the Meta algorithms pushing political content.


  • Not so clear what you mean with “not working” here. Tariffs are costly to both countries. To Mexico because Mexican products become more costly in the US, which reduces demand. To Americans because consumer prices go up. So it’s a lose-lose. Now if Mexico enacts counter tariffs, you get to a lose-lose-lose-lose.

    Now who is the biggest loser crucially depends on the size of the countries and how important trade is. For Mexico trade with the US is much more important than vice versa. These tariffs would be devastating to Mexico. So if that’s what you mean with “working” yeah sure tariffs work.

    What’s important to realise is that these tariffs were enacted without clear demands. So without a clear intention it is impossible to define whether it works. Another point is that such generic barriers to trade are usually reserved for rogue states like Venezuela. Enacting them against arguably your closest friends is a huge escalation of the instrument, and in the long run leaves you without friends.









  • My pet theory is actually that Bernie helped, rather than gutted HRC/Biden. Through his primary campaign so many young people became convinced to vote Democrat. Even if Berniebros were disappointed, most of them still voted for a Democrat in the general election.

    One thing you could really see in this election was that confused progressives moved to Trump (or stayed home) after a successful misinformation campaign. Would have been far harder for that misinformation to find a home, if progressive voters had already voted in the Democratic primary, and their preferred candidate had pointed them to the winner of the primary.

    You could even see this on the GOP side. Because Hailey supported Trump, almost no GOP voters defected in the general election which ultimately resulted in the complete failure of the Democratic strategy.

    TLDR: primaries with a wide variety of choices are extremely helpful in the General election.




  • It must be horrific to talk to Trump in person. He smells horrible, his moods swing constantly, he has incredibly stupid takes on issues you are an expert in, and he requires constant praise. If you take your hot wife with you he’ll be ogling her constantly. Nurses probably go out of their way to see another patient when he’s at the hospital.

    Now you are one of the richest men in the world, and you have to pretend you like him. I mean, something must be seriously wrong with you if you got fuck-you money and still degrade yourself to those levels.