2024 ELECTION THREAD
The next presidential race will be here soon! Please see current Bovada odds. Thoughts?
BOOM for the first time in almost 2 years, "270 to Win" has the Dem ahead of the GOP in the presidential race. For most of this election cycle the electoral college map on 270 to Win hadn't change with then using the map from the 2020 presidential result and removing 6 states from Biden and making them toss up states instead. But now with Harris replacing Biden for the Dem side, the map has changed a couple of times. MN has been given to Harris and Georgia and now North Carolina have been made toss ups instead of likely Trump.
I would say a coordinated effort to try to influence election outcomes using cyberattacks, fake news, targeted propaganda campaigns, and no AI botnets is something we should be concerned with and try to prevent. I guess because you identify other problems in the world (pretty slipper false equivocations but still we’ll let it slide) that we should just let a sanctioned country in the midst of a violent annexation attempt who had just annexed Crimea and had invaded other countries in recent
It should also worry you all when there was a presidential campaigns who knew of these attacks and interference, welcomed them and expected to benefit from them. Then later they deny that the interference occurred.
Which are the conclusions of your own bipartisan congressional investigations on the issue.
Then after winning the election it culminates with the the former candidate and now American president standing on stage in Helsinki in 2018, declaring his support for the head of state from the attacking nation and stating that the attacks never occurred.
It is one of the most pathetic displays of weakness in the history of American foreign policy. It was an invitation to foreign nations to meddle in your internal affairs as much as they want, and you're paying the price for this today.
It should also worry you all when there was a presidential campaigns who knew of these attacks and interference, welcomed them and expected to benefit from them. Then later they deny that the interference occurred.
Which are the conclusions of your own bipartisan congressional investigations on the issue.
Then after winning the election it culminates with the the former candidate and now American president standing on stage in Helsinki in 2018, declaring his support for the head of state from the
Which is more of a Trump problem than a Russia problem
Our relationship with Israel isn't without merit, altogether, but it's a net-negative, and AIPAC is actively working to further this negative relationship that makes America less safe. Washington should take national security more seriously and start placing conditions on our relationship with Israel, as it does with every other country in the world. Conditions which AIPAC actively and successfully fight with every ounce of capital at their disposal. Is this an interference in our democracy? No
It is definitely not correct that the US exclusively places no conditions on Israel, and hold the rest of its allies to some higher moral standard. If anything, it is mostly the opposite.
Have you looked at what Turkey, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia have been up to the last 50 years? These are all supposedly are allies and we consistently look the other way for geopolitical reasons when they do horrible ****. Pakistan literally just kicked out 2 million ethnic Afghanis out of the country. Just came in with bulldozers, destroyed their villages, and told them to start walking and not stop until they crossed the border. 2 million ****ing people. More people than live in Gaza. And not a peep from the US.
I mean, if you want to argue the juice isn't worth the squeeze, that is fine. But this idea Israel is exclusively some horrible actor we unconditionally support because of evil Jew money is just not rooted in reality.
The reality is we are much more judgmental of Israel than all our other "allies" in this part of the world, because we see them as fellow first worlders and hold them to higher standards of behavior AND there is geopolitical reasons to support virulent Muslim antisemitism. There is like 1 billion Muslims in the world and only 15 million Jews; so there are political costs to standing up to Muslim antisemetism, even though it is morally correct.
Russia is currently at war with liberal democracies through hybrid warfare and intelligence operations, with "western" democracies being the main target.
Western countries are merely afraid to bring it up, because it might make Russia angry.
Russia is currently at war with liberal democracies through hybrid warfare and intelligence operations, with "western" democracies being the main target.
Western countries are merely afraid to bring it up, because it might make Russia angry.
Russia has the GDP of Spain, terrible demographic problems, a war which is depleting their human and financial resources massively, and a stock of natural resources which is inexorably going down in value in the long term because of significant changes to the world economy.
They are a dying state with very little power to influence a group of countries with an order of magnitude or more resources and actual power.
Whatever russia attempts can work only because it's actually citizens of western countries agreeing with some (or many?) of Russia geopolitical goals.
There is no "hybrid warfare". Western countries made mistakes, Europe in particular made insane mistakes with immigration, that decreased the quality of life of Europeans, and Russia does nothing more than helping the many people damaged by wrong choices coalesce.
The solution to neutralize russia is to stop doing wrong things that decrease the quality of life of Europeans.
Like you know, stop accepting any immigrant that isn't a fit for our economies, deporting all those who aren't (an immigrant being unemployed for more than a couple of months is a paradox, why does he still have a right to live here???) , stop the green socialism nonsense.
Russia has no power to change significant amount of minds in Europe (and so, has no power to affect our political processes).
But if governments keep insisting on destroying quality of life of citizens they shouldn't be surprised if enemies exploit the absolutely reasonable dissent that grows inside our countries
It is definitely not correct that the US exclusively places no conditions on Israel, and hold the rest of its allies to some higher moral standard. If anything, it is mostly the opposite.
Have you looked at what Turkey, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia have been up to the last 50 years? These are all supposedly are allies and we consistently look the other way for geopolitical reasons when they do horrible ****. Pakistan literally just kicked out 2 million ethnic Afghanis out of the country. Just ca
I said that wrong in the wee hours of the morning. I didn't mean every single other country in the world. I meant "every other" like "I think Dr. Pepper every other day of the week". I also don't support aiding any Islamic states, FWIW. This isn't antisemitism talking. It's my atheism talking.
I'm not downplaying what Russia did. I'm saying that it's common practice in geopolitics. Russia just happens to be more nefarious. I'm, by no means, a moral relativist. I'm more of an absolutist, saying that: if Russia shouldn't be allowed to persuade foreign citizens to decide who leads them, we shouldn't practice those strategies ourselves. That such strategies are necessary in spreading democracy that we will have to find an acceptable degree of accepting that our enemies will also use those
Every powerful country in the world operates according to a double standard on this sort of issue.
FWIW, I never expected evidence of explicit collusion to emerge. I held that view not because I had any confidence in the judgment or ethics of the people around Trump, but rather because it seemed obvious that Putin could accomplish most of his objectives without attempting the risky step of explicit collusion.
FWIW Pakistan isn't an Islamist state. As far as Muslim majority countries go, they are fairly progressives. Not in any absolute sense, but the bar is very, very low. For example women are allowed to hold public office, which you dont see in Islamist states like "Palestine" where women cant even walk in public unattended, much less take place in public life.
Pakistan, culturally and legally, doesn't have many liberal values and behaves horribly often; but that isn't because they are Islamist.
Pakistan LEADERSS are fairly secular, in a sense they are similar to Egypt in that.
The elite don't represent their populations particularly well though, in the sense that any poll conducted in those countries would show the people are (far) more religiously conservative than their leaders.
The Pakistani government is more autocratic and militaristic than it is theocratic.
The whole Russia thing could have been a big nothingburger if Trump wasn't the narcissist he is.
As far as I could tell, he wasn't involved at all but instead of making it clear that he wouldn't put up with any nonsense from Russia, he made it all about him.
The whole Russia thing could have been a big nothingburger if Trump wasn't the narcissist he is.
As far as I could tell, he wasn't involved at all but instead of making it clear that he wouldn't put up with any nonsense from Russia, he made it all about him.
Well, he does have business interests in Russia he doesn't want to compromise by throwing Putin under the bus. Also, as we are seeing with all the dictators of the world lending support to Maduro, even without explicit collusion, dictators and would be dictators like Trump reflexively support each other; as they perceive democracy as a wild fire that can spread if it isn't smothered wherever it pops up.
Every powerful country in the world operates according to a double standard on this sort of issue.
FWIW, I never expected evidence of explicit collusion to emerge. I held that view not because I had any confidence in the judgment or ethics of the people around Trump, but rather because it seemed obvious that Putin could accomplish most of his objectives without attempting the risky step of explicit collusion.
I buy this
FWIW Pakistan isn't an Islamist state. As far as Muslim majority countries go, they are fairly progressives. Not in any absolute sense, but the bar is very, very low. For example women are allowed to hold public office, which you dont see in Islamist states like "Palestine" where women cant even walk in public unattended, much less take place in public life.
Pakistan, culturally and legally, doesn't have many liberal values and behaves horribly often; but that isn't because they are Islamis
Yeah, I throw the term around loosely because my standards are very different. Being largely Muslims coupled with a long history of providing safe haven to Islamic terrorists (AQ, LeT, JuD, MHD) is pretty extreme. Do they share the "values" of Iran and other terror states? No, I'l concede that, but they sure do cozy up to those who do in a pretty explicit manner.
That said, there's a difference between the Pakistani elected state apparatus and the ISI. If you're saying the elected statespeople are acceptable, I can buy this to a degree, but the ISI wags the dog where it matters to the rest of the world.
JD Vance caught saying some more unbelievably stupid things. Hes like 0/5 on saying things not detrimentally dumb. Just can't take his foot out of his mouth for 5 seconds
.... dictators and would be dictators like Trump reflexively support each other; as they perceive democracy as a wild fire that can spread if it isn't smothered wherever it pops up.
Of all the dictators and "would be dictators like trump" how many wants to do each of the following :
cut taxes?
more election security?
to get rid of gov't red tape (such as stopping some of the green energy initiative which has forced extra costs on consumers)?
reduce the power of the courts to go after political figures?
reduce funding from gov't sponsored education and encourage private education?
strengthen private businesses?
Of all the dictators and "would be dictators like trump" how many wants to do each of the following :
cut taxes? on the rich, screw everyone else
more election security? you mean voter suppression
to get rid of gov't red tape (such as stopping some of the green energy initiative which has forced extra costs on consumers)? burn the planet down I say
reduce the power of the courts to go after political figures? This is a good one. You just want Donny to continue being a criminal with no consequences
r
.
Pakistan LEADERSS are fairly secular, in a sense they are similar to Egypt in that.
The elite don't represent their populations particularly well though, in the sense that any poll conducted in those countries would show the people are (far) more religiously conservative than their leaders.
Stay on topic please
I was responding to a post comparing trump to dictators and I was pointing out how some of his policies do the exact opposite of most dictators' policies. So your opinion on if these policies are good or bad isn't super relevant.
If you'd like you can go back and say which of these policies that trump supports are common from actual dictators though.
Of all the dictators and "would be dictators like trump" how many wants to do each of the following :
cut taxes?
more election security?
to get rid of gov't red tape (such as stopping some of the green energy initiative which has forced extra costs on consumers)?
reduce the power of the courts to go after political figures?
reduce funding from gov't sponsored education and encourage private education?
strengthen private businesses?
I'm no world history buff, but wouldn't a present-day Mussolini do some of these things?
I'm not being passive-aggressive. I'm genuinely asking.
Russia has the GDP of Spain, terrible demographic problems, a war which is depleting their human and financial resources massively, and a stock of natural resources which is inexorably going down in value in the long term because of significant changes to the world economy.
They are a dying state with very little power to influence a group of countries with an order of magnitude or more resources and actual power.
Whatever russia attempts can work only because it's actually citizens of western cou
Luciom they hacked into a presidential campaign and Trump encouraged it. The idea that cyber warfare is not possible because Russia has low GDP is insane, especially since their GDP isn’t particularly that low. Look at Iran as well, their GDP is “low” but they are a total agent of chaos in the Middle East. Frankly I don’t even think you are trying to make a good point here, this is just pure propaganda.
This chic for real?
Yea you should pay money on unrealized gains if you have over 100 mill net worth
Let’s maga and go back to 90% income brackets instead
