Trump 2nd term prediction thread
So, looks like Trump not only smashed the electoral college, but is looking on track to win the popular vote, which seems to be an unexpected turn of events, but a clear sign of the current temperature in the country and perhaps the wider world.
Would be interested to hear views on how his 2nd term will pan out from both sides of the aisle - major happenings, what he's going to get done, what he's not going to get done, the impact of his election on the current conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza, whether his popularity will remain the same, wane, or increase, etc.
A bit of an anemic OP, I know, just interested to hear people's thoughts now that the election uncertainty is over.
I didn't make any argument about criticizing that guy (or any other) for the actual bullshit claims.
I have problems when the cultural left pushes fatness for years and that isn't criticized as well though
How does the cultural left push fatness?
that’s a legal theory. is it supported by current interpretation of the laws or is it your preferred interpretation?
it is partially supported by a slow trend in cases moving toward my preferred interpretation.
most recently in 2022 (west Virginia vs EPA)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Vir...
SCOTUS said "enough" when democrats tried to use EPA to violently enforce completely new regulations that were never devised nor passed by Congress.
it is still too wide of an allowance for EPA to operate vs what I prefer but a step in my direction.
moreover the Chevron doctrine of allowing those agencies to "interpret" the law that delegates power to them as they prefer (which was utterly insane) is gone for good (Loper 2024) in a massive win for my "team" even if not exactly the topic of delegation itself (still a topic of how much violence executive agencies can get away with before we tell them to ****ing stop because they can't, the answer now is "less than before")
it is partially supported by a slow trend in cases moving toward my preferred interpretation.
most recently in 2022 (west Virginia vs EPA)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Vir...
SCOTUS said "enough" when democrats tried to use EPA to violently enforce completely new regulations that were never devised nor passed by Congress.
it is still too wide of an allowance for EPA to operate vs what I prefer but a step in my direction.
moreover the Chevron doctrine of allowing those agencies to "i
Why do you keep using the word "violent" when discussing things that have nothing to do with physical violence? It makes you come across as rather unstable.
"body positivity" movement was massive until very recently.
they did the usual: talks of "fatphobia", claims that being anti obesity is to be anti black (and so racist) and so on.
obese models pushed at the top of visibility, ads where obesity was redefined as normal and good, and so on and on
Why do you keep using the word "violent" when discussing things that have nothing to do with physical violence? It makes you come across as rather unstable.
so sending armed people to your place if you don't comply to an arbitrary illegal request isn't violence?
taking your stuff is physical violence, and threatening to do so unless you do what I ask you, is a threat of violence. physical violence.
sometimes it's justified violence: still violence.
everytime a request, if I refuse to comply, down the line can end up with people with guns coming from me or my stuff, that's violence.
so sending armed people to your place if you don't comply to an arbitrary illegal request isn't violence?
taking your stuff is physical violence, and threatening to do so unless you do what I ask you, is a threat of violence. physical violence.
sometimes it's justified violence: still violence.
everytime a request, if I refuse to comply, down the line can end up with people with guns coming from me or my stuff, that's violence.
Yeah, I know you types like to think of every single law or regulation as "under the threat of violence". That explanation doesn't make you sound any less unstable.
Yeah, I know you types like to think of every single law or directive as "under the threat of violence". It still makes you sound pretty unstable.
there is nothing unstable to realize and make transparent, and remind constantly that societal order is founded on violence.
that's a way to remind people necessary violence exists but should be used only when absolutely indispensable and not more than that.
and when people sometimes forget violence underpins our relationship with government, government goes into some rural house with 10 armed guards to euthanize a squirrel and a raccoon because paperwork wasn't in order.
tell me again about how every regulation isn't simply and purely violence
Spoiler
"body positivity" movement was massive until very recently.
they did the usual: talks of "fatphobia", claims that being anti obesity is to be anti black (and so racist) and so on.
obese models pushed at the top of visibility, ads where obesity was redefined as normal and good, and so on and on
You’re right that there is an aspect of body positivity that has taken it to absurd lengths like claiming people who are clearly obese are healthy. It’s good that overweight people aren’t shamed and are allowed to feel good about themselves as they are but at the same time they should obviously be encouraged to lose weight.
You’re right that there is an aspect of body positivity that has taken it to absurd lengths like claiming people who are clearly obese are healthy. It’s good that overweight people aren’t shamed and are allowed to feel good about themselves as they are but at the same time they should obviously be encouraged to lose weight.
can't, as for many (most) other things in life the glue that motivates lazy people (and most people are lazy) is social pressure.
works for doing your homework, for saving, for having children, for eating well, for grooming and dressing properly and so on.
a denial of the enormous positive effects of societal pressure (when it pushes in the right direction) is kinda absurd when it comes from the same people who recognize it can work against fascists, racists and so on
can't, as for many (most) other things in life the glue that motivates lazy people (and most people are lazy) is social pressure.
works for doing your homework, for saving, for having children, for eating well, for grooming and dressing properly and so on.
a denial of the enormous positive effects of societal pressure (when it pushes in the right direction) is kinda absurd when it comes from the same people who recognize it can work against fascists, racists and so on
The difference between being a bigot and being overweight justifies a difference in approach.
The difference between being a bigot and being overweight justifies a difference in approach.
only if you think behavioral determinism for some weird, completely unproven and unscientifical reason would work for dietary habits but not for political habits.
if you posit free will exists at all it's really hard to claim you are physically unable to exercise a little more or eat a little better because of determinants completly outside your control.
otherwise I can buy the "can't control behavior and preferences, low force of will" thing but only if it works for all behaviors
only if you think behavioral determinism for some weird, completely unproven and unscientifical reason would work for dietary habits but not for political habits.
if you posit free will exists at all it's really hard to claim you are physically unable to exercise a little more or eat a little better because of determinants completly outside your control.
otherwise I can buy the "can't control behavior and preferences, low force of will" thing but only if it works for all behaviors
I don’t personally believe in free will and yes I do think the reason I’m not overweight is because I have the right combination of traits both innate and learned in my upbringing. Overweight people weren’t that lucky.
I still think you’re not getting that there’s a fundamental difference between being a bigot and being overweight. Even if social pressure (bullying?) works on both (which I’m not convinced of), only one is inflicting harm on others. That can necessitate more extreme measures in dealing with them. If the harm from being overweight was more immediate there might be an argument there too but usually people can be overweight for some time and be okay if they lose it before the health impact sets in. We should try to take the approach with each that best balances harm and efficacy and I’m not convinced pressure fits the criteria all that often for the overweight.
This is correct. The Democrats play way too much by the rules when it comes to decency and norms. The GOP has no decency and respects no norms. They will do whatever it takes. For them, the ends justify the means, in spite of the fact they try to wrap themselves in the cloak of Christian goodness. Just look at the completely insane lies around the validity of the 2020 election. Don’t be fooled. A true Christian cannot and would not ever vote for Trump. Ever.
Democrats need to take the fight to the gutter. To quote MisssissippiBurning, “These people crawled out of the sewer MrWard, so maybe the gutter is where we should be!”
can't, as for many (most) other things in life the glue that motivates lazy people (and most people are lazy) is social pressure.
works for doing your homework, for saving, for having children, for eating well, for grooming and dressing properly and so on.
a denial of the enormous positive effects of societal pressure (when it pushes in the right direction) is kinda absurd when it comes from the same people who recognize it can work against fascists, racists and so on
I'm sure you have many studies to back up the claims that shaming people motivates them to do what you want.
This is correct. The Democrats play way too much by the rules when it comes to decency and norms. The GOP has no decency and respects no norms. They will do whatever it takes. For them, the ends justify the means, in spite of the fact they try to wrap themselves in the cloak of Christian goodness. Just look at the completely insane lies around the validity of the 2020 election. Don’t be fooled. A true Christian cannot and would not ever vote for Trump. Ever.
Democrats need to take the fi
fact is your team tried and lost anyway.
they had most social media censoring right-wing people under executive pressure (illegal, but we didn't manage to prove it well enough in court yet), they tried to jail trump with various different legal cases, they tried to bankrupt him with sham grotesque fines being issued, they called him Hitler, accused him of what at this point, 50 different episodes of sexual harassment/violence?, demonized his VP pick, blatantly misconstrue everything he said ("bloodbath" episode, "both sides" episode and many others) with 24/7 coverage on Dem controlled media, lamented billionaires manipulating the race in trump favor while billionaires donated almost double to Harris than to Trump (this was quite funny tbh), tried to lie about job creation data (using COVID lows to claim Biden created a ton of jobs and Trump destroyed many).
basically your team tried all the dirty tricks (some probably illegal as well) they thought they could get away with, and still lost.
and they lost with a good economy, low unemployment, inflation tamed (albeit the price index is still too high), stock market at ATH on election day.
how much can your team suck?
fact is your team tried and lost anyway.
they had most social media censoring right-wing people under executive pressure (illegal, but we didn't manage to prove it well enough in court yet), they tried to jail trump with various different legal cases, they tried to bankrupt him with sham grotesque fines being issued, they called him Hitler, accused him of what at this point, 50 different episodes of sexual harassment/violence?, demonized his VP pick, blatantly misconstrue everything he said ("blo
Lol, you're acting like all that was done to Trump. Trump did stuff, others called him out on it, sued him for it, and put him on trial for it. The idea that Trump was somehow unfairly victimised is nonsense, he earned every little bit of what he got and more with his own words and actions, and any pretense to the contrary is just hyper partisan sophistry. You're starting to turn into ****ing Playbig with this tripe.
I'm sure you have many studies to back up the claims that shaming people motivates them to do what you want.
yes it's fairly uncontroversial in literature.
what is rarely predictable is if the reaction is toward "withdrawal" or "approach" after being shamed but that's irrelevant for weight loss.
but psychometry aside, basic 101 economics would tell you that if you increase the costs of a behavior A and increase the rewards of the opposite behavior B, people will do less A and more B (also known as "incentives matter").
claiming shaming people for X doesn't decrease people propensity to do X is like claiming that increasing taxes in something doesn't decrease people propensity to buy it.
elasticity might vary but the effect will be monotonic anyway.
glad to have clarified this for you
