header pic

Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.


Author

Topic: OT-Politics Thread: please TRY to keep it civil, you damned dirty apes

 (Read 3005842 times)

Honestbuckeye

  • Team Captain
  • *******
  • Posts: 6922
  • Liked:
Re: OT-Catch all thread - Personal attacks will result in a time out
« Reply #41888 on: February 14, 2025, 05:04:04 PM »
I see and hear this a lot.  What is far right these days?  From my perspective, the Right currently is Bill Clinton, perhaps even left of him.

The left has towed the rope, and the country is decidedly way further left than 30 years ago. 

Can anyone say what is further right now than 30 years ago?  I have a laundry list of topics where we are miles left of where we were 30 years ago.
Agree.  Saying “ the far right won” doesn’t sync with reality. 
Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.
-Mark Twain

MikeDeTiger

  • All Star
  • ******
  • Posts: 4420
  • Liked:
Re: OT-Catch all thread - Personal attacks will result in a time out
« Reply #41889 on: February 14, 2025, 05:27:02 PM »
No, the answer towards running hard towards the left was running hard towards the right, and like I said, that's what will be our downfall.  The DNC didn't realize how much we hated Hillary, so the far right won.  Then the DNC said, here's a placeholder, and let us figure it out.  America was on board.  Then they asked us to either re-up the placeholder, or vote a far left candidate, and we swung back to the far right candidate we had already rejected.  Going forward I assume we are going to be voting for the far left vs. the far right.  And we generally hate the party in power, so I assume in 2028 we will vote for whatever far left candidate we throw up.  And as we constantly back out of agreements, depending on who is in power, our credit falls, and we become an unreliable power


I disagree with a fair bit of this, so.....SFBadger, take note.  If you keep finding stuff to say that I'm going to agree with, I'm going to replace you with ELA as the nemesis to my obnoxious old fart persona.  

medinabuckeye1

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 10648
  • Liked:
Re: OT-Catch all thread - Personal attacks will result in a time out
« Reply #41890 on: February 14, 2025, 05:44:16 PM »
FIFY.

There's plenty of evidence that both sides have plenty of partisans who see the other side as evil; and plenty who see the other side as misinformed.
I'm not denying that there are some on the right who see those on the left as evil but I strongly disagree with the idea that these traits are even on both sides.  

For one thing, there simply aren't many on the right who NEVER knowingly deal with leftists as associates.  

If you look at exit polling demographics one thing I noticed years ago is this:
  • Republicans win small majorities of large groups.  
  • Democrats win large majorities of small groups.  
Take race:
  • Democrats typically win around 90% of black votes.  
  • Republicans typically win around 60% of white votes.  
There are a lot more whites than blacks in America so it balances out but on an individual level:
  • A typical black American doesn't know ANY Republicans in their family.  There obviously are SOME since the Republican share here isn't actually zero but when it is 1 out of 10 the one is usually going to just keep their mouth shut rather than constantly starting fights that they are outnumbered 9:1 in.  
  • A typical white American is a Republican but 40% of their family, 2 out of 5 are Democrats so they nearly all know at least SOME within their own family.  

Education is similar.  There aren't a lot of people without a HS Diploma but the few who don't have one vote overwhelmingly Democratic.  Similarly, the few PHD's vote overwhelmingly Democratic.  The large majority are somewhere in between those two extremes and this large majority votes Republican by a small margin.  So the same issue comes up.  If you are either a HS Dropout or a PHD then most of your associates will also be of the same group and nearly all of you are Democrats so you might literally NEVER knowingly interact with a Republican.  OTOH, if you are anywhere between those extremes then your associates are also likely between those extremes and while their is a slight Republican lean, there are plenty of Democrats so you DO see them.  

Leftists practice their ideology regularly without thinking that they are engaging in leftist behavior.  I've never seen that en-masse from Republicans.  

ELA

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 22875
  • Liked:
Re: OT-Catch all thread - Personal attacks will result in a time out
« Reply #41891 on: February 14, 2025, 05:55:39 PM »
I see and hear this a lot.  What is far right these days?  From my perspective, the Right currently is Bill Clinton, perhaps even left of him.

The left has towed the rope, and the country is decidedly way further left than 30 years ago. 

Can anyone say what is further right now than 30 years ago?  I have a laundry list of topics where we are miles left of where we were 30 years ago.
I agree Bill Clintons policies are right.  The identity politics we are currently divided on I think of as far right and far left.   ohody in the middle cares.  On one side we are for allowing bilogical men to compete in womens sports, while the other side os fine spending $2.4 million (per the WSJ) to deport 104 contributing Indians back to India, simply because their work visas expired. 

As a Liberarian I do like a lot of what Trump 1.0 did.  I would be very fine with auditing the federal government, but with actual actuaries and accountants, and not a random rich foreign, whose businesses are solely dependent on American handouts.  But hand in hand with that, I think the federal government should sit the fuck out of a lot of social ossues that they are not

medinabuckeye1

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 10648
  • Liked:
Re: OT-Catch all thread - Personal attacks will result in a time out
« Reply #41892 on: February 14, 2025, 05:59:21 PM »
As a Liberarian I do like a lot of what Trump 1.0 did.  I would be very fine with auditing the federal government, but with actual actuaries and accountants, and not a random rich foreign, whose businesses are solely dependent on American handouts.  But hand in hand with that, I think the federal government should sit the fuck out of a lot of social ossues that they are not
I'll say this right now:
Politically, defending government spending is a disaster issue for the Democrats.  Trump/Musk will always be able to find random instances of $2,500 toilet seats or $1,000 hammers or whatever that nearly EVERYONE can agree are wasteful.  If the Democrats are stupid enough to put themselves in the position of defending that, they'll get cooked.  

MikeDeTiger

  • All Star
  • ******
  • Posts: 4420
  • Liked:
Re: OT-Catch all thread - Personal attacks will result in a time out
« Reply #41893 on: February 14, 2025, 06:24:12 PM »
I keep seeing pundits--left and right--talking about what the democrats are going to have to do in order to avoid entering a multi-cycle lull.

I'm not so sure. 

They could continue in disarray and hammering issues that 80% of the country is against, and still do well by virtue of the coalition that got Trump elected this round falling apart. 

It doesn't seem that far-fetched.  It was indeed a wide coalition that came together to get him the win this time, and figures like RFKJ and Tulsi delivered a lot of their so-called independent voters.  There won't be that kind of support for the next candidate, I wouldn't think.  They might not be in the running for cabinet positions with the next guy (or gal) and so have no reason to throw their support.  And their support might dwindle the longer they're seen as "Republicans" and not "moderates." 

You have the zealous evangelical christian crowd, whose voting interests are somewhat at odds with, say, the porn-star chick who showed up at the RNC to endorse Trump.  And again, they might both be at odds with the Union president who showed up to do the same thing.  The list goes on and on, but that's a good example.....when's the last time a major union prez stumped for a Republican? 

It seems plausible, or even likely, that now that the dumbest parts of the democratic party have been beaten back for now, the big happy Republican family isn't likely to hold together too long. 

I suppose the counter-argument is the democratic party has showed zero signs they understand why they lost, or have any intention of changing their tune. 

Still, the hard, dirty work makes a big difference in elections, and I think by nature the leftists are better suited to keep at it like ants rebuilding a hill, whereas by nature conservatives are more geared to doing other things with their lives and being outworked and out-concerned by their counterparts.  Yes, before anybody says it, I'm well aware that are loud, zealous conservatives.  On the whole, it's just a fact that it certainly swings harder one way.  

SFBadger96

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 1845
  • Liked:
Re: OT-Catch all thread - Personal attacks will result in a time out
« Reply #41894 on: February 14, 2025, 06:45:02 PM »
Playing the game of where we stand relative to prior generations of political leanings is an interesting project.

The Democratic party has moved away from union protections, but is still protective of unions. Private unions are a smaller portion of the workforce now. Many people (like Bernie Sanders) claim this is the Dems abandoning the left.
The Democrats are also much less active about trying to establish a single-payer health insurance system than they used to be, so moved to the right.
The party has been more active recently in asserting the rights of LGBTQ+ people and black and Latino people. People view this as a move to the left. Dems (at least this one) often think this is a reaction to greater political winds against these groups, i.e., the Voting Rights Act has been gutted, and there is much more focus on patricularly trans people lately.
Dems continue to focus on "green energy" which is a "left" position, but this isn't much of a change.
Dems have been more supportive of military spending in the Obama and Biden terms than it was during the Clinton administration, and certainly than during the Carter administration. Biden's support for Ukraine has been in line with the traditional hawks' views of national secuirty. So that's a move to the right.
The Dems have been more protective of international trade agreements, which is a move to the right (the unions consistently dislike them).
Since Clinton, the "welfare state" has been significantly curtailed. That's a move to the right. During the 2008 recession and the COVID pandemic both sides spent a lot of public dollars, but given that the W. and Trump administrations spent a bunch of money, it's hard to say that Obama and Biden doing the same thing was an expansion of the welfare state.
Although the Dems continue to have plenty of people advocating for much higher marginal tax rates for the wealthy, as a party they have not done much to make dramatic changes. Biden succeeded in raising some marginal rates, but the Dems seem to have given up on capital gains taxes at lower rates than income taxes, and on estate taxes. Those are moves to the right.
By all accounts, Obama was ready to make a serious move on entitlement spending (Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid). That was a move to the right.

Conversely, Trump says Social Security is off limits, so that's a move to the left.
The Republican Party still wants to diminish the power of the administrative state, although it has gone further to the right on dismantling departments that Nixon set up, i.e., the Dept. of Education and the E.P.A. To be fair, Reagan also didn't like those agencies. Going after the Dept. of Energy is an interesting one: that's primarily the support of nuclear power, which has had more right-leaning support. And the Republicans still want to reduce taxes, primarily through a reduction of the top rates. No change there.
However, the Republican international policy is much more isolationist--is that a right or a left move? I argue that's a move to the right from a historical perspective. It is also a dramatic change from the communist-fighters of the Cold War, and the Middle East policy under Reagan and both Bushes. It could also be viewed as a move to the left--at least in the sense of cutting military spending. Whichever direction it goes, it is a dramatic change from the Republican Party I grew up with.
The Republicans have long targeted affirmative action, but Republicans consistently voted to reauthorize the Voting Rights Act, but that has come to an end. That is a move to the right, as is the attempt to impose heightened voter-ID requirements.
Republicans seem to have given up on LGB issues, but have gone all in on T issues. Move to the left on the former, move to the right on the latter.
Republicans have become much more aggressive about immigration issues. That's a move to the right.
Republicans have abondoned free trade ideology. That is a dramatic change. Is that a move to the right or the left? 30 years ago the Republicans would have called that a move to the left.
On health care, the Republicans seem to have given up on trying to come up with a plan. But maybe that's my jaded perspective. Opposing single payer has remained, but the Obama plan was a variation on a theme that originally came from Romney, and before him (partially) from the Heritage Foundation. So I don't know what to make of that.
Curiously, Trump's frustration with investigations into him and the January 6 incident have resulted in the Republicans turning on federal law enforcement in a way that would make 1960s dems blush. That's arguably a move to the left, but it's hard to separate it from the specifics.
Trump realized a right wing Republican dream of overturning Roe v. Wade, and Republican-controlled state houses have done what they have argued for for many years. No change there, but Trump did de-emphasize abortion in his most recent campaign. Is that a move to the left? Arguably, but I would argue it was coming to grips with political winds as best as possible.

SFBadger96

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 1845
  • Liked:
Re: OT-Catch all thread - Personal attacks will result in a time out
« Reply #41895 on: February 14, 2025, 06:52:12 PM »
I have a giant rant coming one of these days about trans people, but I'll need some time for that one.

In the meantime, @MikeDeTiger is right--again!--that all the handwringing about the chaos in the Democratic party is overwrought. Is there reason for the Democrats to be concerned? Heck yeah there is. Are they rudderless and trying to figure out what to do? Yup.
Does the review of history tell us that it is extremely likely that the Republicans, with their 3-seat majority in the House, will lose the house in 2026? Also yes. If the Trump Administration is able to buck that trend, that would be truly remarkable, just from a historical standpoint.
All that said, the Trump Administration's best bet for hanging on to its majority is to keep the economy really kicking. Happy people vote for incumbents, unhappy people vote for challengers. People with good jobs and strong wages tend to be happy voters. It's not that complicated.

OrangeAfroMan

  • Stats Porn
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 21792
  • Liked:
Re: OT-Catch all thread - Personal attacks will result in a time out
« Reply #41896 on: February 14, 2025, 07:26:27 PM »
I'd like Elon to look at defense spending.
“The Swamp is where Gators live.  We feel comfortable there, but we hope our opponents feel tentative. A swamp is hot and sticky and can be dangerous." - Steve Spurrier

Honestbuckeye

  • Team Captain
  • *******
  • Posts: 6922
  • Liked:
Re: OT-Catch all thread - Personal attacks will result in a time out
« Reply #41897 on: February 14, 2025, 07:40:31 PM »
I'd like Elon to look at defense spending.
For sure!   Me too.  
Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.
-Mark Twain

jgvol

  • Team Captain
  • *******
  • Posts: 5858
  • Liked:
Re: OT-Catch all thread - Personal attacks will result in a time out
« Reply #41898 on: February 14, 2025, 07:58:34 PM »
I'd like Elon to look at defense spending.


jgvol

  • Team Captain
  • *******
  • Posts: 5858
  • Liked:

FearlessF

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 45609
  • Liked:
Re: OT-Catch all thread - Personal attacks will result in a time out
« Reply #41900 on: February 15, 2025, 09:37:52 AM »
US Rep. Tracey Mann (KS-01), chairman of the House Agriculture Committee’s Subcommittee on Livestock, Dairy, and Poultry and Rep. Steve Womack (AR-03), chairman of the Congressional Chicken Caucus, introduced legislation to protect poultry producers and consumers from a President Biden-era regulation that could put producers out of business and drive-up costs for consumers. The legislation prevents the US Department of Agriculture from using federal funds to carry out its proposed rule regarding Salmonella, which Mann and Womack find is not based in science nor indicates a major impact on consumer health. The Biden-era proposed rule disregards data from USDA that found Salmonella outbreaks have decreased 60% since 2020 and that more than 97% of whole chickens tested negative for Salmonella as recently as 2022.

“American families have been clear about the weight that skyrocketing food prices and inflation have had on their ability to put food on their tables.” said Mann. “Rather than coming up with real solutions to drive down costs and make life easier for Americans, President Biden dug his heels deeper in his war on rural America with costly, burdensome regulations. My bill blocks USDA from using taxpayer dollars to implement arbitrary science to burden American families, and it protects America’s livestock producers who work day in and day out to feed a hungry world. I look forward to working with President Trump to end bad, Biden-era nonsense like this.”


“The Biden Administration’s proposed Salmonella Framework places burdensome, unnecessary testing requirements on our nation’s poultry producers,” said Womack. “This leads to higher costs at the grocery store for consumers. I'm proud to help Congressman Mann introduce this bill to prevent federal funding from being used to implement this ludicrous regulatory requirement. I look forward to working with President Trump’s USDA to support America’s farmers and producers—the backbone of our great nation.

The National Chicken Council supports this bill.
"Courage; Generosity; Fairness; Honor; In these are the true awards of manly sport."

847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 31171
  • Liked:
Re: OT-Catch all thread - Personal attacks will result in a time out
« Reply #41901 on: February 15, 2025, 10:40:43 AM »
U RAH RAH! WIS CON SIN!

 

Support the Site!
Purchase of every item listed here DIRECTLY supports the site.