All-purpose news and politics thread: Two Steps Beyond!

[Tendrin]

No, it couldn't. So we just keep decaying from the inside out and the US gets weaker and weaker until someone in the government just takes over or we get conquered from the outside.

No one is going to conquer the United States from the outside. Red Dawn is fiction. xD

As for the rest, I certainly believe many of our governing institutions are in decay... but I believe that conservatism has a lot to do with that and you clearly do not.

Of course, we can't confront a lot of the challenges we face until we recognize there's a problem. You know, income inequality, climate change, concentrated corporate power. Of course, it's hard to get people to recognize a problem when it's not in their self interest to do so.

[Mark]

Yes. Here.

No. Not here. I've tried. I could produce scores of web pages and documents, videos... any sort of evidence in any quantity and it would be dismissed, scorned, ridiculed or ignored. If I dared mention a source such as Fox news no one would even bother reading the rest of the post. People here only read, only listen, only care about what they already believe. A million, million words of argument can be dismissed with the casual wave of willful ignorance and blind anger. Politics has become religion and blaspheme is not tolerated in any place that I've found on the net or in America itself. No one can be persuaded because no one believes that they are wrong, no one believes that the other side isn't evil or crazy or both. You think there's anything I could ever post that could convince the dedicated left that republican's aren't completely evil in all things? There is no tolerance, no discussion, there is only shouted talking points repeated in variation throughout infinity.

[Mark]

No one is going to conquer the United States from the outside. Red Dawn is fiction. xD

As for the rest, I certainly believe many of our governing institutions are in decay... but I believe that conservatism has a lot to do with that and you clearly do not.

No one ever thought Rome could fall either.

[Tendrin]

No one ever thought Rome could fall either.

There's really no comparison.

Rome didn't have nuclear bombs.

[Tendrin]

No. Not here. I've tried. I could produce scores of web pages and documents, videos... any sort of evidence in any quantity and it would be dismissed, scorned, ridiculed or ignored. If I dared mention a source such as Fox news no one would even bother reading the rest of the post. People here only read, only listen, only care about what they already believe. A million, million words of argument can be dismissed with the casual wave of willful ignorance and blind anger. Politics has become religion and blaspheme is not tolerated in any place that I've found on the net or in America itself. No one can be persuaded because no one believes that they are wrong, no one believes that the other side isn't evil or crazy or both. You think there's anything I could ever post that could convince the dedicated left that republican's aren't completely evil in all things? There is no tolerance, no discussion, there is only shouted talking points repeated in variation throughout infinity.

People 'here' do that? You're referring to the tendency for people to sort information through a partisan lens. The idea that this is somehow a problem in the left or a problem with America today is ludicrous. It's a human problem. It's always been a human problem, and to say otherwise, is blatantly myopic. People have /always/ done it and it is nothing new. As for the Republicans? I've met some very nice REpublicans. None of them were politicians.

[worstblogever]

No. Not here. I've tried. I could produce scores of web pages and documents, videos... any sort of evidence in any quantity and it would be dismissed, scorned, ridiculed or ignored. If I dared mention a source such as Fox news no one would even bother reading the rest of the post. People here only read, only listen, only care about what they already believe. A million, million words of argument can be dismissed with the casual wave of willful ignorance and blind anger. Politics has become religion and blaspheme is not tolerated in any place that I've found on the net or in America itself. No one can be persuaded because no one believes that they are wrong, no one believes that the other side isn't evil or crazy or both. You think there's anything I could ever post that could convince the dedicated left that republican's aren't completely evil in all things? There is no tolerance, no discussion, there is only shouted talking points repeated in variation throughout infinity.

Well, thank you for pointing out how easy whatever you might say is easily ridiculed and dismissed. It's nice that you save everyone the trouble.

[Arundel Armor Hunter]

People 'here' do that? You're referring to the tendency for people to sort information through a partisan lens. The idea that this is somehow a problem in the left or a problem with America today is ludicrous. It's a human problem. It's always been a human problem, and to say otherwise, is blatantly myopic. People have /always/ done it and it is nothing new. As for the Republicans? I've met some very nice REpublicans. None of them were politicians.

I never encountered a republican who called the opposition evil, most dems i encountered online cannot imagine the disagreement not coming from a place of evil or crazyness.

[Tendrin]

I never encountered a republican who called the opposition evil, most dems i encountered online cannot imagine the disagreement not coming from a place of evil or crazyness.

I am honestly shocked by this. It's not like I even have to look hard to find it.

But then, I think it depends on the disagreement. Voter suppression is pretty evil, you know? So is denying gay people -- or anyone for that matter -- their rights.

[Mister Mets]

It wasn't anyone "switching sides", it was the Democrats sitting home like they always do for the midterms. Nothing changed politically in the mental landscape of the US, just in the percentages of those who voted.

Nope, pretty much every group was more conservative than in the 2012 elections.

The biggest change came from Asian-Americans.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/1...n_6138548.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...re-republican/

And let's not discount the effects of gerrymandering on the races for congress in both the House and local elections where lines were drawn by the tea party in 2010 to protect Republicans. The effect is that even when Democrats are the majority in the state, they still lose.

These numbers are from Michigan House races alone:


Yet, Republicans won 9 of 14 races.

In the state House, the results are much the same:

In the races for the state House, Democrats got more votes, Republicans INCREASED their margin:



Between gerrymandering and the cap on the number of seats in the House, is it any surprise that the House isn't serving it's constitutional purpose?

The effect of gerrymandering isn't as significant as the effect of geographic sorting.

Basically, liberals have a greater tendency to live in areas where they're overwhelming majorities (urban centers) or unlikely to matter (liberal enclaves in conservative districts, such as college towns in Nebraksa.)

The traditional method of splitting congressional districts so that communities are kept intact helps Republicans.

They can't be THAT stupid.

They're not. The next in line is Kevin McCarthy.

[Mister Mets]

America, where healthcare and education is a privilege, and guns are an established right akin to breathing.

To be fair, healthcare and education cost a lot of money.

It isn't as expensive to allow people to buy guns if they want.

That is the law of the land, if you want to change it just ammend the Contition. But I would warn you most state legilatures would be making the right to keep arms stronger not weaker as would the current and near future congresses

For practical purposes the Bill of rights trump everything else. That is how a CONSTITUTIONAL Democracy is supposed to work

Aside from getting rid of the state militia clause, how could the right to keep arms be stronger than it currently is?

[Kid A]

This headline is the Obama administration in a nutshell.

Obama taps investment banker for top Treasury finance post

Not really. The only practical way it could matter would be if the election came down to one vote- and that almost never happens.

Uh, you might want to watch the 2008 documentary Swing Vote, if you really think that.

To be fair, healthcare and education cost a lot of money.

Yes, but allocating that money wouldn't be a problem if it wasn't for bad economic policies, and if the government gave any damn about its people.

[worstblogever]

Yes, but allocating that money wouldn't be a problem if it wasn't for bad economic policies, and if the government gave any damn about its people.

Also, if we would stop being in perpetual war. Or spending so much on it that even the Pentagon was asking for less money.

But Lockheed/Martin and Boeing have some really slick lobbyists, it seems.

[JCAll]

No one ever thought Rome could fall either.

Nobody thought Rome was invincible, it had come too close to the edge too many times. The Punic Wars, anyone?

A great many things lead to the eventual fall of Rome. They were collapsing under the sheer size for one, it took days/weeks/months to put people where they need to be or even just send a message. Size was a huge problem for empires of old. They were in a constant state of war for another. The Legion may have been the symbol of Rome, but I'm sure it got tiring that whenever they weren't invading someone they were being invaded themselves. It was eventually the barbarians at the gates that took the empire. Their economy was completely at the whims of luck. A plague hits part of the empire, barbarians take an important trade route, there's nothing you can really do and suddenly you have a lot less money coming in.

With telecommunications what they are today the world has become tiny, advances in science and medicine have left less and less to random chance, and the stabilization of the world economy we've already eliminated most of the pitfalls of ancient empires. As for invasion, we're smack dab in the middle of out own continent, with oceans on either side and allies to out north and south, and the local populace long since subjugated and integrated into our society. We've already won, we are now essentially invasion-proof.

The USA is probably the most stable empire in history, the only real threat to us now is us. I can only hope we continue to learn from history and not fall into ignorance, arrogance, and debauchery. Actually, I could use a good debauchery right about now, but my point still stands.

[JediMindTrick]

I never encountered a republican who called the opposition evil, most dems i encountered online cannot imagine the disagreement not coming from a place of evil or crazyness.

Try being a libertarian like me. Both the liberal and conservative sides scream and pout at you for helping the other side. Depending on which side is yelling at us, we are just dope smokers, racists, anarchists, kooks, satan worshipers, homophobes, gay lovers, etc. Too many people (many who post right in this thread) cannot comprehend a world view other than their own so they respond with personal attacks on you and your ideology. And they clearly can't comprehend libertarians when they assume that its similar to either major side (an overly simplistic description is that economically we are closer to conservatives but socially we are closer to liberals).

Not to mention that besides this board there is one other I post on. This board clearly tilts decidely liberal and here I get viewed as conservative. The other board tilts hard right and there I'm a kook liberal. In reality I'm neither but both sides tend to resort to name calling and attacks on the character of anyone who disagrees.

Or to put it more clearly. In the 2012 election I mentioned on both boards that I voted for Gary Johnson (libertarian) for president. Here I got attacked for trying to help Mitt Romney win. On the other board I got attacked for trying to help Obama win. In reality since I don't live in a swing state all I did was try to help Gary Johnson get 5% of the vote so that libertarians could get a seat at the debate tables (we failed).

[CSTowle]

Without guns there would never have been a free America. The ability of a group of armed individuals to form and resist a tyrannical government wouldn't have existed if they hadn't had guns.

Not in the particular time period our country fought for independence, no. Also, not without a lot of help from the French Navy and the not insignificant span of water separating England and the Colonies. Irrelevant to the discussion of gun ownership in the 21st century, however. If it helps some sad old men to entertain the fantasy that "some day soon a revolution is coming", and that they're going to march on Washington and fight the US Armed forces with their deer hunting rifle, I'm OK with that. It's harmless.

It's the heavy duty weaponry that (while also harmless to the military and the government as institutions, if not so to individuals who represent it) can do mass damage to groups of civilians I want regulated. Weapons capable of popping off 30 rounds have no real use for hunting or self defense (unless word got around the bear community that you've been stealing cubs, or you angered an organized crime group in which case you're probably better off running/hiding anyway) but are excellent for ruining the lives of strangers when an unbalanced individual gets ahold of them.