Politics The Hangar Politics Thread

Remove this Banner Ad

ant555 said:
There would be plenty where I have wasted time trying to discuss anything with you.
Who says talking shit on a footy forum is worrying about things out of my control ?
Click to expand...
I was only making a joke.
 
doug85 said:
View attachment 2160316

View attachment 2160314
I think Bernie nailed it. I’d add that the democrats should’ve held some form of primary to run a candidate with even a modicum of charisma.
Click to expand...

I really don't think he did. first, let's consider what Bernie said after 2016. A quick search returns:
Acknowledging Trump’s success in taping into economic resentment in his astounding electoral win Wednesday morning, Sanders cast Trump’s candidacy in a light similar to his own failed presidential run during the Democratic primaries.

“Donald Trump tapped into the anger of a declining middle class that is sick and tired of establishment economics, establishment politics and the establishment media,” the senator said in a statement released Wednesday.

“People are tired of working longer hours for lower wages, of seeing decent paying jobs go to China and other low-wage countries, of billionaires not paying any federal income taxes and of not being able to afford a college education for their kids — all while the very rich become much richer.”

So much the same, just middle class instead of working class.

Let's have a think about the last four years and the "working class". The obvious starting point is that Biden spent the last 4 years being one of the most pro-union presidents ever. He encouraged Amazon factory workers to form a Union. That is, he pissed off one of the richest people in the world, Jeff Bezos, to encourage working class people to get their fair share. The newspaper Bezos owns would, of course, go onto to not endorse a president for the first time in decades. Biden became the first ever president to walk a picket line with striking workers at a motor plant in Michigan. Michigan has voted for Trump. Biden announced a massive bailout for the Teamsters pension fund in 2022 to ensure retired workers didn't have their pensions smashed. Biden and the Democrats reward for that? The Teamsters didn't endorse anyone for this election.

it's been reported that between 2019 - 2023, wage growth for low wage workers was faster than medium to high wage workers and much better than the trend that has been observed since the 1970s to 2010s. Some of Biden's policies and legislative achievements were built around bringing manufacturing jobs back to the US.. The CHIPS act is all about that, for example.. And Trump spent the days leading up to the election raging against the Chips act (by the way, this gave us one of the funnier events of this election, in which someone asked the Republican Speaker of the House if he'll attempt to repeal the CHIPS act, in line with Trump's comments, and he said yeah we probably will and then the Republican house member took the mic to basically say we will absolutely not repeal it....and then that guy didn't win his election. Look where bipartisanship gets ya!)

When I was looking for a factory article, I came across this one by Reuters, titled "Built-in bias: Study finds US factory boom disproportionately favors poorer counties which I would have thought is pretty good for working class people. the headline, to be fair, is not written by the author but the article carries this quote: "Indeed, a disproportionate share of the locales are Republican strongholds that regardless of Biden's largesse lean heavily toward former President Donald Trump in the run-up to the Nov. 5 election, which is shaping up to be a rematch between the two men. In polling, Biden persistently gets low marks for his handling of the economy despite historically low unemployment, persistently strong job growth, and above-average wage increases, especially for the lowest-earning workers.")

I just don't think there's much to say that the Democrats were insufficiently supportive of working class people. When US elections happen, probably like to use the results to jump on whatever hobby horse they want. so obviously Bernie will say Democrats have turned their back on the working class. Just as Pro-Israel people will say that the Democrats lost because they turned their back on Israel and Pro-Palestine people will say it's because they turned their back on Gaza, and so much more.

But really, it was inflation that lost them the election, and it cost them with groups beyond working class people. The post-covid inflation spike is basically one of the only sustained inflation spikes in the western world for the last 30 years. And every politician in power is being reminded that people ****ing hate inflation spikes and they will blame you. People may say well that's hardly fair. The inflation spike was caused by events out of their control. Doesn't matter. You get the blame. Are Trump's main economic polices of "mass migration" and tariffs the exact type of policy that could cause another inflation spike? Yeah. Doesn't matter. Hasn't happened yet. (it would be funny if, with inflation down to 2% and interests rates being cut, Trump decided not to take the present he's been left with and instead pursues those policies anyway)

It's clear that inflation wrecked the Dems chance of winning the presidency. Harris' results in the swing seats - loses but typically with lower swings towards Trump than the non-swing states as well as some of the down-ballot results which aren't too bad for the Dems suggests overall dissatisfaction with Biden/A Dem As Pres, and that was it too much to overcome in such a short time. This is also why the "they should have a run a primary" opinion is silly. Harris did pretty well all things considered. They simply didn't have time for a primary. It's on Biden for trying to run again.

With that said, I will jump on my hobby horse and say that some of the results vindicate my view that the decades long refusal from Democratic Mayors and Democratic Governors to build enough housing in their cities and states because architecture professors and humanities graduates don't like new tall buildings is a massive problem for them. Like here, the solutions to the housing crisis are mostly not in the hands of the federal government, but that doesn't mean they don't get the blame for it. One of the factors in the overall swing to Trump has almost certainly got to be housing costs that come from decades and decades of inadequate housing growth

And then add the fact that almost all of the fastest growing states are rock solid Republican and you get a big problem for the Dems. The rock solid Dem states lose Election College votes at each election - Texas has added 8 votes since 2000. NY is down 5. California is at the same amount as in 2000. Most of the NE is either the same or down/up one while Florida is rocking along

Harris acknowledged this fact in her campaigning but she can't approve the houses. It's up to the local democrats in charge to sort it out
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this ad.

Phone said:
I really don't think he did. first, let's consider what Bernie said after 2016. A quick search returns:
Acknowledging Trump’s success in taping into economic resentment in his astounding electoral win Wednesday morning, Sanders cast Trump’s candidacy in a light similar to his own failed presidential run during the Democratic primaries.

“Donald Trump tapped into the anger of a declining middle class that is sick and tired of establishment economics, establishment politics and the establishment media,” the senator said in a statement released Wednesday.

“People are tired of working longer hours for lower wages, of seeing decent paying jobs go to China and other low-wage countries, of billionaires not paying any federal income taxes and of not being able to afford a college education for their kids — all while the very rich become much richer.”

So much the same, just middle class instead of working class.

Let's have a think about the last four years and the "working class". The obvious starting point is that Biden spent the last 4 years being one of the most pro-union presidents ever. He encouraged Amazon factory workers to form a Union. That is, he pissed off one of the richest people in the world, Jeff Bezos, to encourage working class people to get their fair share. The newspaper Bezos owns would, of course, go onto to not endorse a president for the first time in decades. Biden became the first ever president to walk a picket line with striking workers at a motor plant in Michigan. Michigan has voted for Trump. Biden announced a massive bailout for the Teamsters pension fund in 2022 to ensure retired workers didn't have their pensions smashed. Biden and the Democrats reward for that? The Teamsters didn't endorse anyone for this election.

it's been reported that between 2019 - 2023, wage growth for low wage workers was faster than medium to high wage workers and much better than the trend that has been observed since the 1970s to 2010s. Some of Biden's policies and legislative achievements were built around bringing manufacturing jobs back to the US.. The CHIPS act is all about that, for example.. And Trump spent the days leading up to the election raging against the Chips act (by the way, this gave us one of the funnier events of this election, in which someone asked the Republican Speaker of the House if he'll attempt to repeal the CHIPS act, in line with Trump's comments, and he said yeah we probably will and then the Republican house member took the mic to basically say we will absolutely not repeal it....and then that guy didn't win his election. Look where bipartisanship gets ya!)

When I was looking for a factory article, I came across this one by Reuters, titled "Built-in bias: Study finds US factory boom disproportionately favors poorer counties which I would have thought is pretty good for working class people. the headline, to be fair, is not written by the author but the article carries this quote: "Indeed, a disproportionate share of the locales are Republican strongholds that regardless of Biden's largesse lean heavily toward former President Donald Trump in the run-up to the Nov. 5 election, which is shaping up to be a rematch between the two men. In polling, Biden persistently gets low marks for his handling of the economy despite historically low unemployment, persistently strong job growth, and above-average wage increases, especially for the lowest-earning workers.")

I just don't think there's much to say that the Democrats were insufficiently supportive of working class people. When US elections happen, probably like to use the results to jump on whatever hobby horse they want. so obviously Bernie will say Democrats have turned their back on the working class. Just as Pro-Israel people will say that the Democrats lost because they turned their back on Israel and Pro-Palestine people will say it's because they turned their back on Gaza, and so much more.

But really, it was inflation that lost them the election, and it cost them with groups beyond working class people. The post-covid inflation spike is basically one of the only sustained inflation spikes in the western world for the last 30 years. And every politician in power is being reminded that people ****ing hate inflation spikes and they will blame you. People may say well that's hardly fair. The inflation spike was caused by events out of their control. Doesn't matter. You get the blame. Are Trump's main economic polices of "mass migration" and tariffs the exact type of policy that could cause another inflation spike? Yeah. Doesn't matter. Hasn't happened yet. (it would be funny if, with inflation down to 2% and interests rates being cut, Trump decided not to take the present he's been left with and instead pursues those policies anyway)

It's clear that inflation wrecked the Dems chance of winning the presidency. Harris' results in the swing seats - loses but typically with lower swings towards Trump than the non-swing states as well as some of the down-ballot results which aren't too bad for the Dems suggests overall dissatisfaction with Biden/A Dem As Pres, and that was it too much to overcome in such a short time. This is also why the "they should have a run a primary" opinion is silly. Harris did pretty well all things considered. They simply didn't have time for a primary. It's on Biden for trying to run again.

With that said, I will jump on my hobby horse and say that some of the results vindicate my view that the decades long refusal from Democratic Mayors and Democratic Governors to build enough housing in their cities and states because architecture professors and humanities graduates don't like new tall buildings is a massive problem for them. Like here, the solutions to the housing crisis are mostly not in the hands of the federal government, but that doesn't mean they don't get the blame for it. One of the factors in the overall swing to Trump has almost certainly got to be housing costs that come from decades and decades of inadequate housing growth

And then add the fact that almost all of the fastest growing states are rock solid Republican and you get a big problem for the Dems. The rock solid Dem states lose Election College votes at each election - Texas has added 8 votes since 2000. NY is down 5. California is at the same amount as in 2000. Most of the NE is either the same or down/up one while Florida is rocking along

Harris acknowledged this fact in her campaigning but she can't approve the houses. It's up to the local democrats in charge to sort it out
Click to expand...


What happens when you google difference in energy policy between Trump and Biden?
 
BrunoV said:
What happens when you google difference energy policy between Trump and Biden?
Click to expand...

see attached

but this is a fun one, because we get to attack political parties on behalf of the working class either way. supportive of fossil fuels? then that means you hate the working class, who are likely to be most valuable to the consequences of climate change. supportive of clean energy? you hate the working class, who are likely to be most valuable to the immediate economic consequences of shifting in that direction.

1731157759948.png
 
Phone said:
see attached

but this is a fun one, because we get to attack political parties on behalf of the working class either way. supportive of fossil fuels? then that means you hate the working class, who are likely to be most valuable to the consequences of climate change. supportive of clean energy? you hate the working class, who are likely to be most valuable to the immediate economic consequences of shifting in that direction.

View attachment 2161760
Click to expand...


So we can at least agree that Biden's admin prefers a policy that has a direct, negative impact on inflation? It has preferenced taking action on climate change, hasn't it?

Beause underpinning the discussion about inflation is the assumption that its covid related. Energy policy has an impact, increasing inflation, and that's got nothing to do with covid. It even includes geopolitical decisions, from the sanctions on Russia to causing the Russians to blow up Nordstream 2, if that's what you want to believe happened. How many hundreds of billions were printed and given to Ukraine or went somewhere in that general direction?
 
Last edited:
Phone said:
I really don't think he did. first, let's consider what Bernie said after 2016. A quick search returns:
Acknowledging Trump’s success in taping into economic resentment in his astounding electoral win Wednesday morning, Sanders cast Trump’s candidacy in a light similar to his own failed presidential run during the Democratic primaries.

“Donald Trump tapped into the anger of a declining middle class that is sick and tired of establishment economics, establishment politics and the establishment media,” the senator said in a statement released Wednesday.

“People are tired of working longer hours for lower wages, of seeing decent paying jobs go to China and other low-wage countries, of billionaires not paying any federal income taxes and of not being able to afford a college education for their kids — all while the very rich become much richer.”

So much the same, just middle class instead of working class.

Let's have a think about the last four years and the "working class". The obvious starting point is that Biden spent the last 4 years being one of the most pro-union presidents ever. He encouraged Amazon factory workers to form a Union. That is, he pissed off one of the richest people in the world, Jeff Bezos, to encourage working class people to get their fair share. The newspaper Bezos owns would, of course, go onto to not endorse a president for the first time in decades. Biden became the first ever president to walk a picket line with striking workers at a motor plant in Michigan. Michigan has voted for Trump. Biden announced a massive bailout for the Teamsters pension fund in 2022 to ensure retired workers didn't have their pensions smashed. Biden and the Democrats reward for that? The Teamsters didn't endorse anyone for this election.

it's been reported that between 2019 - 2023, wage growth for low wage workers was faster than medium to high wage workers and much better than the trend that has been observed since the 1970s to 2010s. Some of Biden's policies and legislative achievements were built around bringing manufacturing jobs back to the US.. The CHIPS act is all about that, for example.. And Trump spent the days leading up to the election raging against the Chips act (by the way, this gave us one of the funnier events of this election, in which someone asked the Republican Speaker of the House if he'll attempt to repeal the CHIPS act, in line with Trump's comments, and he said yeah we probably will and then the Republican house member took the mic to basically say we will absolutely not repeal it....and then that guy didn't win his election. Look where bipartisanship gets ya!)

When I was looking for a factory article, I came across this one by Reuters, titled "Built-in bias: Study finds US factory boom disproportionately favors poorer counties which I would have thought is pretty good for working class people. the headline, to be fair, is not written by the author but the article carries this quote: "Indeed, a disproportionate share of the locales are Republican strongholds that regardless of Biden's largesse lean heavily toward former President Donald Trump in the run-up to the Nov. 5 election, which is shaping up to be a rematch between the two men. In polling, Biden persistently gets low marks for his handling of the economy despite historically low unemployment, persistently strong job growth, and above-average wage increases, especially for the lowest-earning workers.")

I just don't think there's much to say that the Democrats were insufficiently supportive of working class people. When US elections happen, probably like to use the results to jump on whatever hobby horse they want. so obviously Bernie will say Democrats have turned their back on the working class. Just as Pro-Israel people will say that the Democrats lost because they turned their back on Israel and Pro-Palestine people will say it's because they turned their back on Gaza, and so much more.

But really, it was inflation that lost them the election, and it cost them with groups beyond working class people. The post-covid inflation spike is basically one of the only sustained inflation spikes in the western world for the last 30 years. And every politician in power is being reminded that people ****ing hate inflation spikes and they will blame you. People may say well that's hardly fair. The inflation spike was caused by events out of their control. Doesn't matter. You get the blame. Are Trump's main economic polices of "mass migration" and tariffs the exact type of policy that could cause another inflation spike? Yeah. Doesn't matter. Hasn't happened yet. (it would be funny if, with inflation down to 2% and interests rates being cut, Trump decided not to take the present he's been left with and instead pursues those policies anyway)

It's clear that inflation wrecked the Dems chance of winning the presidency. Harris' results in the swing seats - loses but typically with lower swings towards Trump than the non-swing states as well as some of the down-ballot results which aren't too bad for the Dems suggests overall dissatisfaction with Biden/A Dem As Pres, and that was it too much to overcome in such a short time. This is also why the "they should have a run a primary" opinion is silly. Harris did pretty well all things considered. They simply didn't have time for a primary. It's on Biden for trying to run again.

With that said, I will jump on my hobby horse and say that some of the results vindicate my view that the decades long refusal from Democratic Mayors and Democratic Governors to build enough housing in their cities and states because architecture professors and humanities graduates don't like new tall buildings is a massive problem for them. Like here, the solutions to the housing crisis are mostly not in the hands of the federal government, but that doesn't mean they don't get the blame for it. One of the factors in the overall swing to Trump has almost certainly got to be housing costs that come from decades and decades of inadequate housing growth

And then add the fact that almost all of the fastest growing states are rock solid Republican and you get a big problem for the Dems. The rock solid Dem states lose Election College votes at each election - Texas has added 8 votes since 2000. NY is down 5. California is at the same amount as in 2000. Most of the NE is either the same or down/up one while Florida is rocking along

Harris acknowledged this fact in her campaigning but she can't approve the houses. It's up to the local democrats in charge to sort it out
Click to expand...

Good post, nice to see some sources for claims made too.
 
Short of putting boots on the ground how does anyone propose we stop the war in Ukraine?
 
boncer34 said:
Short of putting boots on the ground how does anyone propose we stop the war in Ukraine?
Click to expand...

Assuming by we you mean NATO, I'm not sure there's any quick way that isn't a pretty drastic escalation.

Giving Ukraine weaponry that allows them to strike well inside Russia is probably the easiest thing to do, but would it push Putin to escalate and bring some kind of nuclear weapons in to play?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

boncer34 said:
Short of putting boots on the ground how does anyone propose we stop the war in Ukraine?
Click to expand...
Give Ukraine a bunch of JASSMs and stare down Putin when he starts threatening to nuke everyone
 
faible said:
Assuming by we you mean NATO, I'm not sure there's any quick way that isn't a pretty drastic escalation.

Giving Ukraine weaponry that allows them to strike well inside Russia is probably the easiest thing to do, but would it push Putin to escalate and bring some kind of nuclear weapons in to play?
Click to expand...
Ukraine's given the Russians their best shot.

But they're going to be ground down eventually, sheer weight of numbers is heavily favouring Russia. I don't think pouring more weaponry or money into it will prevent Russia from winning.
 
Old Campaigner said:
Give Ukraine a bunch of JASSMs and stare down Putin when he starts threatening to nuke everyone
Click to expand...
I've read they're to expensive and rare to make a long lasting difference.
 
boncer34 said:
Ukraine's given the Russians their best shot.

But they're going to be ground down eventually, sheer weight of numbers is heavily favouring Russia. I don't think pouring more weaponry or money into it will prevent Russia from winning.
Click to expand...
Which is why long range weapons that can hit critical economic infrastructure like oil refineries are a good option.
 
Old Campaigner said:
Which is why long range weapons that can hit critical economic infrastructure like oil refineries are a good option.
Click to expand...
Are they?

Putin won't just go bigger?
 
One has to understand the Ukraine mindset at the moment, after so long of fighting. The idea of causing an escalation at the cost of themselves and the region is more favourable than the idea of backing down to Russia and/or being at their mercy.

One only has to remember in the early stages of the war when Zelenskyy was calling for fighter jets to come in and provide aerial support, something that would have meant total interference despite no NATO membership and what would have effectively escalated into possibly a world war.

And, I do not blame them.

When a person is drowning, they will often pull you down with them to achieve what they think of as survival.

One of the only things that can wrangle this mindset is dependency, which Ukraine is on the US (the next biggest provider of financial/military assistance is Germany at 12%, which it too relies on US technology).

The moment you remove this from the equation you run the risk of Ukraine wanting to go it their own way if they deem whatever they're asked of to be unacceptable, which would go down the path of the escalation I spoke about. Not only that but we're trying to de-nuke the world, not nuclearize it even more.

Trump's approach, of which may include ultimatums based on finance and a coercion of Putin to make some concessions of his own, may be unpopular with Ukraine/Europe, but he will deem it as popular in the US which is all he cares about. However, it must and would need to be stipulated around some sort of concrete certainty of Ukraine's security going forward as it would just be something that could flare up again in the future.

The trick there is, how do you guarantee that something like this won't happen again with a stronger certainty than the word of a sitting President with,

  • No NATO membership (which Russia won't agree to) and,
  • By not arming Ukraine with region destructive weaponry.

It would have to be done with this in mind. The only other way is if Trump decides he doesn't care about Ukraine's future by forcing them into a deal with the mindset of being the President to "end wars, not start them" for the duration of his presidential legacy and kick the can down the road.
 
Last edited:
boncer34 said:
Are they?

Putin won't just go bigger?
Click to expand...
Other than nukes what else can he do? I doubt very much that he’d resort to that as he’d be breaking the biggest global taboo in history
 
boncer34 said:
Short of putting boots on the ground how does anyone propose we stop the war in Ukraine?
Click to expand...


Withdrawing US support for the Ukranian slaughter is what Trump is talking about.

This war would never have been fought without the intervention of the west, which traces back most simply to the overthrow of the Yanukovic government in 2014 and then to early 2022 when the US (I think it was Kamala days before the invasion) was insisting on Ukraine's admission into NATO. It's origins are really in the attempted liquidation of Russia and Ukraine in the immediate aftermath of the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Why is Ukraine in NATO unacceptable for Russia? Because it would place US nuclear weapons within minutes of Moscow which would upset the balance struck (so that the nuclear superpowers are deterred from striking). We've seen it before, with the Cuban missile crisis, which was a Soviet response to the presence of nuclear weapons in Turkey and that brought the world to the brink. I don't think we need to bother with the hypothetical of what would happen if the Russians were trying to strike a NATO like alliance with Mexico. The world has been through it.

All of the funding and provision of weapons is what has facilitated conscription of Ukraine's youth, generations of which has been fed into the Russian meat grinder. More recently Ukraine was up to conscripting over 40s because the war was going so well.

Why does anyone think Ukraine is worth going to nuclear war over, anyway? A comment I am not specifically directing to you. Does anyone seriously think the US and its allies are fighting this war to protect Ukranian sovereignty? Maybe I make a stack of erroneous assumptions about people. For example, I assume that anyone commenting in this thread would take an extremely cynical position in relation to US activity in the middle east. Plenty of sovereignty violated there, millions dead and millions more displaced. But we're in the European theatre so all of the sudden western activity is beyond reproach?
 
Last edited:
Old Campaigner said:
Other than nukes what else can he do? I doubt very much that he’d resort to that as he’d be breaking the biggest global taboo in history
Click to expand...
Escalate with more long range weapons?

I mean, I'm only asking because I don't see a way out.
 
BrunoV said:
Withdrawing US support for the Ukranian slaughter is what Trump is talking about.

This war would never have been fought without the intervention of the west, which traces back most simply to the overthrow of the Yanukovic government in 2014 and then to early 2022 when the US (I think it was Kamala days before the invasion) was insisting on Ukraine's admission into NATO. It's origins are really in the attempted liquidation of Russia and Ukraine in the immediate aftermath of the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Why is Ukraine in NATO unacceptable for Russia? Because it would place US nuclear weapons within minutes of Moscow which would upset the balance struck (so that the nuclear superpowers are deterred from striking). We've seen it before, with the Cuban missile crisis, which was a Soviet response to the presence of nuclear weapons in Turkey and that brought the world to the brink. I don't think we need to bother with the hypothetical of what would happen if the Russians were trying to strike a NATO like alliance with Mexico. The world has been through it.

All of the funding and provision of weapons is what has facilitated conscription of Ukraine's youth, generations of which has been fed into the Russian meat grinder. More recently Ukraine was up to conscripting over 40s because the war was going so well.

Why does anyone think Ukraine is worth going to nuclear war over, anyway? A comment I am not specifically directing to you. Does anyone seriously think the US and its allies are fighting this war to protect Ukranian sovereignty? Maybe I make a stack of erroneous assumptions about people. For example, I assume that anyone commenting in this thread would take an extremely cynical position in relation to US activity in the middle east. Plenty of sovereignty violated there, millions dead and millions more displaced. But we're in the European theatre so all of the sudden western activity is beyond reproach?
Click to expand...

Capitulating to expansionist authoritarian regimes doesn't end well.
 
faible said:
Capitulating to expansionist authoritarian regimes doesn't end well.
Click to expand...
Does endlessly pouring money and resources into a losing battle end well?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Politics The Hangar Politics Thread

Similar threads

Sporno 4 Pyros
Sport The Essendon Board’s Paris 2024 Olympics Thread
2 3
Replies
63
Views
2K
Sporno 4 Pyros
Sporno 4 Pyros
BrunoV
Win Prizes The Essendon Board Talks 9/11
2 3 4 5
Replies
100
Views
1K
Kong
Kong

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top