2020 Politics Thread - Enter At Your Own Risk - RULES IN OP

[NeedChapmans]

Originally Posted by jdhaugh11

Just like Topps does when you try to buy 2 boxes when they say 1 per customer, Topps will cancel both orders.
This is what they should do with people that try to vote twice.

A little bit of levity LOL on comparing Topps to the National election in terms of policy but I really don't know how it will shake out (and what is/isn't allowed per state).

I plan to vote in person; problem solved.

[NeedChapmans]

Well then gee golly; I guess we all better do what we can to make a Biden landslide happen so my country isn't in chaos!

Some perspective.

[TheFrenzy]

[Disclaimer: Nothing in this post has to do with Trump or the 2020 election. This is about worldviews.]

I do place a much higher premium on individuals working to improve themselves and I do believe that the more self-sufficient someone is the more ability they have to assist others.

I disagree with the "bootstrap" mentality of many conservatives, especially since I've worked with so many f'd up kids who were abused by adults before they were even old enough to wear boots.

That said, there is a consistency among conservatives that I do wish more liberal Americans would recognize and apply. The average conservative generally thinks that success comes from developing one's self, failure comes from failing to develop, and the average person on the Left wants success without having to develop themselves.

This worldview only sees half the picture—it recognizes some important truths while missing others—but it is at least internally consistent. It doesn't make an exception for its opponents. It sees them as operating according to human nature just like everyone else.

At present, the general worldview among liberal Americans lacks this consistency in a major way.

This worldview tends to focus on the other half of the social equation and obscures the individual in favor of identifying larger, systemic trends. Liberals view society through a telescope while conservatives view it through a microscope. This is why we see many among them defending everything from crime to looting to burning down commercial districts and assaulting officers. As one liberal poster in this thread tried to explain: "The facts and details don't matter because what we're trying to get across is that these are angry and grieving communities expressing themselves." Which is fine.

If we're at least consistent with that view.

But the inconsistency comes into focus when we then turn the telescope towards conservatives and try to understand them. Suddenly the mantra of "every group is simply responding to larger systemic conditions and no individual is responsible for their contribution to that reaction" goes right out the window. Suddenly we're pointing the finger and doxxing and canceling every individual conservative voter we can find. Suddenly we have an exception. I can still hear the "MuH eCoNoMiC aNxIeTy" memes that were deployed every time someone actually stopped and tried to understand the bigger picture of where conservatives were coming from. Instead, we've just papered over the whole affair with collective terms for individual failings like "racism," "sexism," and "xenophobia."

"I'm tolerant of everything but intolerance" can be internally consistent, but it has to be consistently applied. If liberalism actually demanded that every member group purge itself of homophobia, patriarchy, bigotry, and pro-life views, then the coalition of minority communities would collapse. Perhaps the single most uncomfortable truth in American politics is that there is quite a bit of racism/sexism/homophobia/anti-science among middle and lower class whites.........but there's even more of it in middle and lower class non-white communities.

Again, I'm coming from the middle. I think both worldviews (as generally stated) only see half the picture. And I even think conservatism's internal consistency can be a bit of a curse because it can make it that much harder for me show that there's another side to the coin. But I am very concerned by the inconsistency of current liberalism and its tendency to want to wield whatever power it acquires in an arbitrary manner.

[yanksfan1]

Originally Posted by Jgil316

YES - all damn clowns!!

We need term limits on the House and Senate.... and fast!!!!!!

I'm contrarian in that I think term limits are a horrible idea, as well as unconstitutional. They will only increase the polarization within congress, especially in the senate. Say the senate had a 2-term limit (12 years). Once you win re-election to that second term, you cannot run for re-election so you don't have to worry about ever being held accountable by your constituents. The more extreme members will only be further emboldened to run to the extremes. Not only this, but they will spend their entire 2nd term thinking about their post-senate employment opportunities and that will affect how they vote. Maybe I'm wrong, that's just my two cents. The more efficient way to get people you don't like out of congress would be to beat them at the ballot box.

[JeremyNick]

Originally Posted by NeedChapmans

Well then gee golly; I guess we all better do what we can to make a Biden landslide happen so my country isn't in chaos!

Some perspective.

I agree and I put the odds on a Biden landslide as big as a Jorgensen landslide.

But I’m a conspiracy theorist so who knows.

[NeedChapmans]

Originally Posted by JeremyNick

I agree and I put the odds on a Biden landslide as big as a Jorgensen landslide.

But I’m a conspiracy theorist so who knows.

That's a pretty nice country you got over there. Would be a shame if something happened to it.

[AwesomeBrian]

Originally Posted by DegaBama

Ahh, the famous, "Trump is to blame for the deaths and the economy" line.

You mean.... like this?

[ballhawkdawk]

Originally Posted by NeedChapmans

She's lost her damn mind if she thinks hiring an attorney and pressuring the shop owner is a good idea. She could have apologized (whether she meant it or not) and the media would have swept it under the rug like always ... just a footnote forgotten in time. Now, she's claiming a conspiracy to set her up; trying to get the shop closed down ... it's INSANE.

Take the L Nancy. You're not doing your party, your state or your legacy any favors.

I don't trust any of these losers. All of the pandering for political gain has been pathetic to watch, but I'd care less if it wasn't so disingenuous. Even in a clear moment of, "you're wrong... own it," a politician just doesn't have the self-awareness to own it, apologize, and promise to do better moving forward. Instead, she doubles down on the hypocrisy and stupidity by blaming the shop owner, and is apparently now suing the shop owner. Her only acknowledgement to any wrongdoing was that she apologized for getting duped... whatever that means. I guess she apologizes for being dumb but not for being hypocritical. I can excuse the former but not the latter.

[NeedChapmans]

Originally Posted by yanksfan1

I'm contrarian in that I think term limits are a horrible idea, as well as unconstitutional. They will only increase the polarization within congress, especially in the senate. Say the senate had a 2-term limit (12 years). Once you win re-election to that second term, you cannot run for re-election so you don't have to worry about ever being held accountable by your constituents. The more extreme members will only be further emboldened to run to the extremes. Not only this, but they will spend their entire 2nd term thinking about their post-senate employment opportunities and that will affect how they vote. Maybe I'm wrong, that's just my two cents. The more efficient way to get people you don't like out of congress would be to beat them at the ballot box.

True and False.

Yes, lame duck Senators will likely vote and act differently than ones who plan a re-election campaign. Look at Jeff Flake for example; once he decided no longer to be a Senator, he started openly speaking out against the President. In that vain, I think term limits are a good idea because it frees up a politician to truly be themselves, without fear.

But as you noted, that knife cuts both ways. It could also mean enacting policy with a "I don't give a damn" attitude because they won't be around to clean up the mess. That said, if bad things happen under a lame duck senators watch, that would likely help the opposing party in the next election which could help in adjusting the policy.

I don't know what the limits should be but I do believe there should be limits. Career politicans should not be a thing. It should be part of who you are, not your legacy and I don't think it serves in the best interest of the American people.

[NeedChapmans]

Well, Psychology is not going to be the major of choice for my son or daughter, I promise you that!

[TheFrenzy]

Originally Posted by NeedChapmans

Well, Psychology is not going to be the major of choice for my son or daughter, I promise you that!

"APA calls for true systemic change in U.S. culture"

Clarification: The quote in the tweet wasn't made by the American Psychological Association (APA). It is included in the linked article, but it was a statement by Theopia Jackson, president of the Association of Black Psychologists.

What actual association is calling for in the "manifesto" is three-fold:

1. Look to science to identify and address racial disparities.

2. Work to ensure that the APA is training and licensing enough psychologists of diverse backgrounds so that every American has a decent chance at having someone to talk with who has had similar social experiences.

3. Making a greater effort to listen to minority communities.

[TheHeel]

Great news! My Biden/Harris lawn sign shipped.

It’ll go great with my stickers.

[Hootiefish]

Originally Posted by AwesomeBrian

You mean.... like this?

The problem is, though, no one seems to care about his hypocrisy. Definitely not his supporters, who'll either a) ignore the fact that he's full of sh!t; b) accept the fact that he's full of sh!t but not care because "he's on their side"; c) try and explain away the fact that he's full of sh!t; or, d) say everyone's full of sh!t so it doesn't matter.

I really believe Trump was right when he said he could shoot someone on 5th Ave. and he wouldn't lose a vote. Not since Jim Jones have we seen such devotion to such a flawed person.

[ballhawkdawk]

Originally Posted by TheFrenzy

[Disclaimer: Nothing in this post has to do with Trump or the 2020 election. This is about worldviews.]

I do place a much higher premium on individuals working to improve themselves and I do believe that the more self-sufficient someone is the more ability they have to assist others.

I disagree with the "bootstrap" mentality of many conservatives, especially since I've worked with so many f'd up kids who were abused by adults before they were even old enough to wear boots.

That said, there is a consistency among conservatives that I do wish more liberal Americans would recognize and apply. The average conservative generally thinks that success comes from developing one's self, failure comes from failing to develop, and the average person on the Left wants success without having to develop themselves.

This worldview only sees half the picture—it recognizes some important truths while missing others—but it is at least internally consistent. It doesn't make an exception for its opponents. It sees them as operating according to human nature just like everyone else.

At present, the general worldview among liberal Americans lacks this consistency in a major way.

This worldview tends to focus on the other half of the social equation and obscures the individual in favor of identifying larger, systemic trends. Liberals view society through a telescope while conservatives view it through a microscope. This is why we see many among them defending everything from crime to looting to burning down commercial districts and assaulting officers. As one liberal poster in this thread tried to explain: "The facts and details don't matter because what we're trying to get across is that these are angry and grieving communities expressing themselves." Which is fine.

If we're at least consistent with that view.

But the inconsistency comes into focus when we then turn the telescope towards conservatives and try to understand them. Suddenly the mantra of "every group is simply responding to larger systemic conditions and no individual is responsible for their contribution to that reaction" goes right out the window. Suddenly we're pointing the finger and doxxing and canceling every individual conservative voter we can find. Suddenly we have an exception. I can still hear the "MuH eCoNoMiC aNxIeTy" memes that were deployed every time someone actually stopped and tried to understand the bigger picture of where conservatives were coming from. Instead, we've just papered over the whole affair with collective terms for individual failings like "racism," "sexism," and "xenophobia."

"I'm tolerant of everything but intolerance" can be internally consistent, but it has to be consistently applied. If liberalism actually demanded that every member group purge itself of homophobia, patriarchy, bigotry, and pro-life views, then the coalition of minority communities would collapse. Perhaps the single most uncomfortable truth in American politics is that there is quite a bit of racism/sexism/homophobia/anti-science among middle and lower class whites.........but there's even more of it in middle and lower class non-white communities.

Again, I'm coming from the middle. I think both worldviews (as generally stated) only see half the picture. And I even think conservatism's internal consistency can be a bit of a curse because it can make it that much harder for me show that there's another side to the coin. But I am very concerned by the inconsistency of current liberalism and its tendency to want to wield whatever power it acquires in an arbitrary manner.

Well said, and I entirely agree. I agree that conservatives are more likely to miss the mark on certain social issues and don't make exceptions for outliers such as kids who grew up abused or without parents, but they're at least consistent. The liberals are the ones demanding change and demanding to be heard, not the conservatives, but the target keeps moving and there's so much inconsistency and hypocrisy that it not only makes it easy for a combative conservative to just point out the hypocrisies, but it makes it difficult for an open-minded conservative to get on board.

Focusing on the message about being self-sufficient and individually dependent, I've found the same to be true in discussions with conservatives I know personally. It seems like no matter the circumstance, they believe an individual should be able to overcome, often citing extreme examples of individuals overcoming adversity, as if everyone should have the fortitude to excel against all odds. I don't have a great counter to that other than the fact that it seems unreasonable and callous. I've done the same thing in this thread that I'm criticizing those same conservatives of, but context is important, and there's nuance to it.

I take a personal approach that my outcomes are entirely my responsibility. It's a philosophy I've learned, and I believe is the more empowering approach to life. No matter what, your life is your fault... period. And I'd advise any individual to take the same approach. You can only control what you can control, and by taking full responsibility for your life outcomes, you've designated yourself and only yourself as the captain of your ship. Assigning responsibility to others is essentially empowering them. Assigning responsibility to yourself inspires creativity and improves problem solving ability in ways that assigning responsibility to others simply doesn't. You're shorting yourself by blaming anyone but yourself.

There's a separate macro belief I hold that I do think social safety nets are essential to our country. One of the beauties of America is that opportunity is plentiful and it's nearly impossible to completely fail. Those with truly harsh upbringings deserve some degree of assistance to realize these opportunities. The degree and makeup of the assistance can be debated, but for example, I don't believe that a person who loses both parents in elementary school and is abused by the uncle that takes them in is to blame for his/her situation in life. Life has completely failed that person, and it's unreasonable to expect him/her to excel in spite of it, even if it's possible. To me, it's like saying, "Allen Iverson was a great basketball player. You don't need to be 6'6"+ to play in the NBA," and then applying this blanket logic across the board to anyone under 6'6" who isn't NBA level. What's possible /= what's reasonable.

What I'd be curious to hear more about from a more liberal minded person is where they feel personal agency begins and ends. At what point is your life your responsibility, and how much assistance is reasonable? I feel like both sides are too far in the wrong direction, and like most things, the best outcome lies somewhere much closer to the middle.

[discostu]

Haven't checked in for a bit...did we run a poll as to the site for our Bastille when the revolution comes?

It seems like we've done a fantastic job joining sides and driving spikes deeper, but surely there will be a point when we realize that being pitted against each other is merely staring at the wrong enemy.

Class war seems inevitable as the divides grows deeper.

[37Jetson]

What will you do with your sign and stickers when Biden/Harris are dumped for Michelle Obama/Insignificant VP ticket?

Originally Posted by TheHeel

Great news! My Biden/Harris lawn sign shipped.

It’ll go great with my stickers.

[Hootiefish]

Originally Posted by discostu

Class war seems inevitable as the divides grows deeper.

I believe the same. I don't think it'll be in my lifetime, and I hope it's not in my son's lifetime, but there is no way we can keep going in our current trajectory.

The gap between the haves and the have-nots is only growing wider. That is unsustainable.

The rich don't realize that they are training and arming their future adversaries. The military and police aren't populated with their economic equals. Once they lose their grip on that segment of the populace, it'll be every man for themself.

[Astros19]

Originally Posted by AwesomeBrian

You mean.... like this?

Hypocrisy aside, there's a pretty big difference in our country in 2020 compared to 2013.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[Hootiefish]

Originally Posted by Astros19

Hypocrisy aside

That should be the motto of the Trump supporter.

[Chris Lyle]

Originally Posted by Hootiefish

That should be the motto of the Trump supporter.

It goes for both sides. Glad to see that you've joined the club of running people down that dont agree with you. Now on top of all the other names I've been called earlier in this thread now I'm a Jim Jones type kool aid drinker. And dems get mad about the names that Pres. Trump calls people

[Hootiefish]

Originally Posted by Chris Lyle

It goes for both sides. Glad to see that you've joined the club of running people down that dont agree with you. Now on top of all the other names I've been called earlier in this thread now I'm a Jim Jones type kool aid drinker. And dems get mad about the names that Pres. Trump calls people

If the tinfoil hat fits ...

[Astros19]

Originally Posted by Hootiefish

If the tinfoil hat fits ...

You can't recognized the hypocrisy on both sides?
How hypocritical of you.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[Chris Lyle]

Originally Posted by Hootiefish

If the tinfoil hat fits ...

Sorry just because I CHOOSE to vote for someone doesn't mean that I'm racist, kool aid drinker, among all the other names that have been thrown around.

[Hootiefish]

Originally Posted by Chris Lyle

It goes for both sides. Glad to see that you've joined the club of running people down that dont agree with you. Now on top of all the other names I've been called earlier in this thread now I'm a Jim Jones type kool aid drinker. And dems get mad about the names that Pres. Trump calls people

Seriously though, you cannot deny the level of devotion that Trump supporters have borders on unhealthy. Supporters are constantly bending over backward defending the indefensible.

Look at some of the artwork supporters make of him. Hell, he's literally the hero of a conspiracy theory. It's ridiculous.

Trump supporters have taken on the visage of Trump himself. Never admit you are wrong and always attack.

[Hootiefish]

Originally Posted by Astros19

You can't recognized the hypocrisy on both sides?
How hypocritical of you.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

I can honestly say that, regarding levels of hypocrisy, Trump is unmatched.

It's not hyperbole to say that Trump has lied more blatantly than any other politician, let alone president, in history.