Political and Social Problems and Solutions Facing the United States - Discuss

[Felya]

He is perfect to the conservatives, don't see why you'd be surprised.

Surprised? No, I said I would use your post history, to show that Biden isn’t the scary extreme left that Trump and his supporters claim. All the people claiming that liberals are drones following each other in to the great liberal extreme, can just get a link to your posting history, showing how conservative Biden is.

Want to stop political extremes? Look at what extreme liberals and extreme conservatives are saying about Biden... than ask your self, why are extremes so scared?

Edit: Listen to the communist... Biden is the perfect antithesis... the perfect conservative...

[JohnBrown1917]

Surprised? No, I said I would use your post history, to show that Biden isn’t the scary extreme left that Trump and his supporters claim. All the people claiming that liberals are drones following each other in to the great liberal extreme, can just get a link to your posting history, showing how conservative Biden is.

So you agree with me. Good to see.

Want to stop political extremes? Look at what extreme liberals and extreme conservatives are saying about Biden... than ask your self, why are extremes so scared?

Anybody left-of-center should be opposed to Biden's plans, why even further increase police funding? Or just look at his history, like the crime bill or how important he was to the Iraq war.


Why is opposing of all this now extreme left wing? Or did you finally stop pretending and start seeing yourself as somebody on the right?

[Felya]

So you agree with me. Good to see.

You are confusing agreement, with understanding.

Anybody left-of-center should be opposed to Biden's plans, why even further increase police funding? Or just look at his history, like the crime bill or how important he was to the Iraq war.

Indeed... conservatives that are sick of Trump, listen to this communist. Join us in the anti Trump camp to stop communists and fascist with one, single vote. Two extremes, with one vote...

For more information on why both extremes are terrifying, here is a ‘story’ that covers both... at the same time:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homage_to_Catalonia

Why is opposing of all this now extreme left wing? Or did you finally stop pretending and start seeing yourself as somebody on the right?

Dude... you are a communist. You exemplify the extreme of all left extremes... you are the boogie man. Plus... it’s a fresh new tact... I hope you enjoy...

U N I T Y... that spells unity!!!



I think this may be the first time I posted that video unironically...

[JohnBrown1917]

You are confusing agreement, with understanding.

So you understand that Biden would be popular with conservatives? Thats the same as agreeing with me lol

Indeed... conservatives that are sick of Trump, listen to this communist. Join us in the anti Trump camp to stop communists and fascist with one, single vote. Two extremes, with one vote...

I already oppose Trump. Or do you think its impossible for other people, who are not me, to critize Biden without supporting Trump?

For more information on why both extremes are terrifying, here is a ‘story’ that covers both... at the same time:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homage_to_Catalonia

A book by a socialist who would never support somebody like Biden and supported/fought for the anarchists in Spain, Good job. He is on the far left in your country, just so you know.
I think you misstook opposing authortianism as somekind of centrist rallying cry?

Dude... you are a communist. You exemplify the extreme of all left extremes... you are the boogie man. Plus... it’s a fresh new tact... I hope you enjoy...

U N I T Y... that spells unity!!!

I'm not the only leftist in this world, you know. If you don't understand how Biden's policies are opposite to pretty much any left-wing idealogy, I really don't know how to help you understand.
Him being the lesser evil does not mean he has good policies. How is funding the police even more a solution to the police problem?

[Felya]

So you understand that Biden would be popular with conservatives? Thats the same as agreeing with me lol

No, because I don’t see a president being popular with constituents on the opposite side of the isle, as a flaw. It’s why extremes of all kinds need to be stopped... unity... not ideological segregation... fuck the extremes.

I already oppose Trump. Or do you think its impossible for other people, who are not me, to critize Biden without supporting Trump?

Not sure what this has to do with anything... yes... a fascist and communist don’t get along... well... a communist and anyone not as extreme, can’t get along. Time to unite and kick both extremes square in the balls... that’s the major political problem in US... extremes need to be taken down. Unity > Extremes...

A book by a socialist who would never support somebody like Biden. Good job.

Are you sure about that? You think the guy persecuted by communists, will side with communists in not supporting Biden, in stopping a fascist like Trump? Are you sure about that? Orwell fought in a war to stop fascists, yet you think he would oppose voting Biden to stop Trump? lol...

Who took Orwell to court... communists or fascist? Have you read animal house? Oink... oink...

I'm not the only leftist in this world, you know.

No, but you are the simplest example of a communist.

- - - Updated - - -

If you don't understand how Biden's policies are opposite to pretty much any left-wing idealogy, I really don't know how to help you understand.

I’m not a communist... I don’t get trapped in ideological extremes, that claim Violence Against Women Act, is against left-wing ideology... because Biden sponsored it. /shrug

Him being the lesser evil does not mean he has good policies. How is funding the police even more a solution to the police problem?

No, it doesn’t... what if the funding is tied to reform? What if, the police that don’t reform, are defunded in the sense of not getting funding... while those they do reform, do get funded? What if Biden said that?

[Fahrenheit]

I feel like a lot of the problems would sort themselves out over the next decade or two if we stop FoxNews and their ilk from poisoning the water. I’ve seen it first hand, both my parents would argue that Trump was the only thing holding us back from disaster during the Coronavirus, and that he (Trump) needed to “stop listening to those two crazy doctors”. That’s fucking insane.

[Felya]

I feel like a lot of the problems would sort themselves out over the next decade or two if we stop FoxNews and their ilk from poisoning the water. I’ve seen it first hand, both my parents would argue that Trump was the only thing holding us back from disaster during the Coronavirus, and that he (Trump) needed to “stop listening to those two crazy doctors”. That’s fucking insane.

It’s the extremes taking over. But, fox does have an even more extreme competitor now, with OAN. We will see how that changes the media landscape, but I do believe Trump will try to buy a major stake in OAN, once out of office. Big enough stake, to rename them Trump TV...

[Cynep]

The biggest problem, after the cornerstone problem of FPTP system of course, is the continued usage of unidimensional left-right political classification, even though it was already outdated 200 years ago. The opposite of liberal is not conservative but totalitarian. The opposite of conservative is not liberal but progressivist. But FPTP reinforces "us vs them" two-camp mentality, and unidimensional left-right false perspective makes it worse. So, when a European says "Liberalism is a right-wing ideology", someone from USA can't comprehend that, it doesn't fit their perception pattern. "You don't understand American politics", they reply.

And because it's impossible for a middle-ground third camp to form in USA, the two opposing camps grow more and more distant from each other, to the current point where the idea of dialogue is outright dismissed. How can a peaceful agreement be reached if negotiations can never begin?

[Endus]

The biggest problem, after the cornerstone problem of FPTP system of course, is the continued usage of unidimensional left-right political classification, even though it was already outdated 200 years ago. The opposite of liberal is not conservative but totalitarian. The opposite of conservative is not liberal but progressivist. But FPTP reinforces "us vs them" two-camp mentality, and unidimensional left-right false perspective makes it worse. So, when a European says "Liberalism is a right-wing ideology", someone from USA can't comprehend that, it doesn't fit their perception pattern. "You don't understand American politics", they reply.

And because it's impossible for a middle-ground third camp to form in USA, the two opposing camps grow more and more distant from each other, to the current point where the idea of dialogue is outright dismissed. How can a peaceful agreement be reached if negotiations can never begin?

FPTP is not the cause of any real problems in American politics. It is not why you have a two-party system. The USA is not the only FPTP system on the planet, but it is the only FPTP system that's led to a two-party dynamic. Canada's a FPTP system, and we waffle between 3 and 5 relevant (more than 1-2 seats elected) parties each election. Because FPTP isn't what creates a two-party system. It's the Electoral College that does that. A system explicitly designed to be undemocratic.



The left/right barometer isn't useless, but it is over-invested. It's not the only political axis to consider, and there's no necessary ideological unity between groups on either "side". The biggest difference here in the USA is that the right wing in the USA basically boils down to one strong ideological group (the Republicans), and a smaller basically irrelevant voice (the Libertarians). Anyone outside of this either calls themselves an "independent", or is harangued into joining one of those groups and falling in ideological lockstep in all ways. That doesn't exist on the American left; this is why you get plenty of little enclaves like the Justice Democrats and Blue Dog Democrats. You'll find that most such distinctions in the Republican Party represent groups justifying why they fall in lockstep, like Log Cabin Republicans, rather than having an ideologically distinct point of view at odds with the majority of the party.

[Antiganon]

FPTP is not the cause of any real problems in American politics. It is not why you have a two-party system. The USA is not the only FPTP system on the planet, but it is the only FPTP system that's led to a two-party dynamic. Canada's a FPTP system, and we waffle between 3 and 5 relevant (more than 1-2 seats elected) parties each election. Because FPTP isn't what creates a two-party system. It's the Electoral College that does that. A system explicitly designed to be undemocratic.

The electoral college is just FPTP at scale.

FPTP is the problem. It would be less of a problem if all 50 states awarded electors based on congressional districts, with the two kickers going to the statewide popular vote winner. Then NY Republicans living upstate and Texas Democrats living in Dallas or Houston would get to have an actual vote in terms of the Presidency.

Bigger issue is that FPTP and the obscene levels of money in politics prevents third parties from really taking hold. We have 535 elected representatives and senators in Congress, and a grand total of 2 independent senators (basically both Democrats in all but name), 1 libertarian representative (who was Republican until he was kicked out of the party for supporting impeachment), and 4 vacant seats.

For example, you might get 30% of people in California who would vote for a Progressive Party candidate. California has 53 districts, so that would be 16 representatives. The problem is that you don't have a Progressive Party majority in 16 districts, you have minority Progressive Party support spread out across all 53 districts, so Democrats, being the better candidate for Progressives (as opposed to the Republican candidate), get the votes.

[Endus]

The electoral college is just FPTP at scale.

FPTP is the problem. It would be less of a problem if all 50 states awarded electors based on congressional districts, with the two kickers going to the statewide popular vote winner. Then NY Republicans living upstate and Texas Democrats living in Dallas or Houston would get to have an actual vote in terms of the Presidency.

If FPTP systems were the problem, you'd see other FPTP nations with two-party systems.

You don't.

The USA is the only one.

It's not FPTP. That's a scapegoat used to avoid addressing the real issue.

[Elegiac]

FPTP is not the cause of any real problems in American politics. It is not why you have a two-party system. The USA is not the only FPTP system on the planet, but it is the only FPTP system that's led to a two-party dynamic. Canada's a FPTP system, and we waffle between 3 and 5 relevant (more than 1-2 seats elected) parties each election. Because FPTP isn't what creates a two-party system. It's the Electoral College that does that. A system explicitly designed to be undemocratic.

Yeah....no. Sorry man you're usually right on the money but this is erroneous.

The US might be an outlier in terms of how extreme it is - which, to your credit, is in fact a function of things like the electoral college, the high level of separation of powers, et cetera - but FPTP does in fact reinforce a two party structure simply because it creates the existence of spoiler votes and wasted votes.

Canada, and my own mother country Australia do not have the electoral college or a high degree of separation of powers (being Westminster democracies), but it's dishonest to say that both do not have what I like to call "Diet Bipartisanship"; there are large third parties that can hold the balance of power and, by virtue of them being parliamentary democracies, will often be required to form a government in the form of coalitions. But for all intents and purposes there is a fairly fixed two party divide: Liberal vs. Conservative in Canada, and the ALP vs. the Liberal Coalition in Australia. Canada's is reinforced by retaining FPTP, Australia has an outright two party preference on its instant runoff voting for the House of Representatives.

- - - Updated - - -

If FPTP systems were the problem, you'd see other FPTP nations with two-party systems.

You don't.

The USA is the only one.

Psst. This isn't true, as I point out above.

[Kokolums]

I mean, I know you said leave it to the general thread, but certainly getting rid of Trump would be one hell of a start. It's hard to enact change when your leader has narcissistic personality disorder.

You can't get rid of Trump. Its vastly more likely Trump is about to get rid of the democrats.

And even if you got rid of Trump, you'd just get someone worse. Reagan used to be the biggest evil to democrats until Newt Gingrich came along. Then Newt suddenly became a minor issue when George W. Bush came along and they called Bush a war criminal. Now Bush is a minor issue compared to Trump. It just keeps getting worse. But I don't think you can get rid of Trump. Decades of hardline actions have destroyed trust and pushed the electorate to him.

- - - Updated - - -

The political problem is that the two parties don't represent a majority of people's ideologies.

The social problem is that people conflate race with culture and can't ascend above tribalism.

And apparently the democrats think the answer is to force their cultural views on a tribal people who are free and strong enough to fight back effectively. AND the democrats are in the minority opinion in the sphere of the conflict. By a LOT. The democrats are vastly outnumbered, vastly outgunned, and are provoking that majority with a stick. This is NOT how to resolve the social and political problems.

[Antiganon]

If FPTP systems were the problem, you'd see other FPTP nations with two-party systems.

You don't.

The USA is the only one.

It's not FPTP. That's a scapegoat used to avoid addressing the real issue.

I mean if you want to just snip the rest of my post and pretend I didn't mention the other contributing factors I guess that's cool.

FPTP
Electoral College
Obscene amounts of money in politics
Wide distribution of minority candidate support

Case in point, one of the 5 major parties in Canada is specifically interested in advocating for Quebecois issues. That party does not need to worry about having their support dispersed across all your provinces. They won 32 of 78 seats from Quebec, 32 of 338 in Canadian Parliament in 2019. If you wanted a third party in the US to win that same percentage of seats in the House (ignoring the Senate, though they would need to win seats in both House and Senate to actually have a meaningful impact on legislation), they would need to win at least a plurality in 41 Congressional districts. That simply isn't feasible given party politics in the US in 2020.

And apparently the democrats think the answer is to force their cultural views on a tribal people who are free and strong enough to fight back effectively. AND the democrats are in the minority opinion in the sphere of the conflict. By a LOT. The democrats are vastly outnumbered, vastly outgunned, and are provoking that majority with a stick. This is NOT how to resolve the social and political problems.

What Democratic cultural views do you find particularly objectionable? Equal rights? Actual oversight of the executive branch and law enforcement by elected officials? Progressive taxation? Clean energy? Religious freedom for non-Christians as well as Christians? LGBTQ equality?

[Elegiac]

You can't get rid of Trump. Its vastly more likely Trump is about to get rid of the democrats.

And even if you got rid of Trump, you'd just get someone worse. Reagan used to be the biggest evil to democrats until Newt Gingrich came along. Then Newt suddenly became a minor issue when George W. Bush came along and they called Bush a war criminal. Now Bush is a minor issue compared to Trump. It just keeps getting worse. But I don't think you can get rid of Trump. Decades of hardline actions have destroyed trust and pushed the electorate to him.

With what army, hun? If they aren't going to brutalise protesters for him, what on earth makes you think they're going to help him try to retain power when he loses the election?

"The electorate" being who? The people are out in the streets already, and they aren't rooting for him. Lol.

The democrats are vastly outnumbered, vastly outgunned, and are provoking that majority with a stick. This is NOT how to resolve the social and political problems.

What majority?

There's no silent majority. It's a myth.

[Logwyn]

People just need to take a massive chill pill. I really think moderates to the right and left are where universally the real sanity is.

The real problem is far right and far left crazies with their pinpoint pupils going full cray cray foam at mouth at everyone who is not agreeing with them.

There isn't a far-right and far-left in American politics compared to the world. Mostly centrists and slight right. Part of it is a holdover from the Cold War and "scary" commies will take over and the word socialism is a sin.

- - - Updated - - -

The electoral college is just FPTP at scale.

FPTP is the problem. It would be less of a problem if all 50 states awarded electors based on congressional districts, with the two kickers going to the statewide popular vote winner. Then NY Republicans living upstate and Texas Democrats living in Dallas or Houston would get to have an actual vote in terms of the Presidency.

Bigger issue is that FPTP and the obscene levels of money in politics prevents third parties from really taking hold. We have 535 elected representatives and senators in Congress, and a grand total of 2 independent senators (basically both Democrats in all but name), 1 libertarian representative (who was Republican until he was kicked out of the party for supporting impeachment), and 4 vacant seats.

For example, you might get 30% of people in California who would vote for a Progressive Party candidate. California has 53 districts, so that would be 16 representatives. The problem is that you don't have a Progressive Party majority in 16 districts, you have minority Progressive Party support spread out across all 53 districts, so Democrats, being the better candidate for Progressives (as opposed to the Republican candidate), get the votes.

FPTP is not everywhere in the US though. Many state and local elections require runoffs if you do not get a certain number of votes. One of the problems is that the media hammers in that there are only two candidates an R and a D. Another problem I stated is that American politics is centrist. Every time a third-party candidate has tried to run they cause whichever of the Democrat or Republican is closest to the third party to lose the election.

So in effect, you have to look at which of the two parties covers what you want in government. Just take the lumps with it. Like if I like the fiscal conservative viewpoint of the Republican party but hate the fact it's tied to the Christian Far-right. Yeah, I can go vote Libertarian because of their more "liberal" view on social issues coupled with conservated econ policy but you'd end up getting the Democrats elected. Which you do not want.

End up taking the lumps and just vote Republican because you'd rather have the economics. Just an example.

[Kallisto]

If FPTP systems were the problem, you'd see other FPTP nations with two-party systems.

You don't.

The USA is the only one.

It's not FPTP. That's a scapegoat used to avoid addressing the real issue.

It's not the only one. Even Canada on a national scale is liberal vs Conservative. Block quebecoi is local, taking the place of one of the other 2 main parties there and ND is barely a thing. For all intents and purposes Canada is a 2 party nation.

If it had another voting system ND, Greens and others would have a say in things instead of barely a whimper.

- - - Updated - - -

What Democratic cultural views do you find particularly objectionable? Equal rights? Actual oversight of the executive branch and law enforcement by elected officials? Progressive taxation? Clean energy? Religious freedom for non-Christians as well as Christians? LGBTQ equality?

Knowing him from his posts elsewhere it's being nice to introverts. If the democrats were more catering to extroverts then they wouldn't need to surrender to the far right to stop the inevitable civil war.

[downnola]

Are you sure about that? You think the guy persecuted by communists, will side with communists in not supporting Biden, in stopping a fascist like Trump? Are you sure about that? Orwell fought in a war to stop fascists, yet you think he would oppose voting Biden to stop Trump? lol...

Who took Orwell to court... communists or fascist? Have you read animal house? Oink... oink...

Reminds of the time a burner account tried to claim that Christopher Hitchens would have supported Trump because of his previous opposition to Clinton. Nevermind the fact that everything Hitchens (and Orwell for that matter) ever wrote was in opposition to totalitarianism and fascism.

If ideology is the only thing you care about, it's easy to ignore the enemy in plain sight and ramble on about how impure your allies are.

[JohnBrown1917]

There isn't a far-right and far-left in American politics compared to the world. Mostly centrists and slight right. Part of it is a holdover from the Cold War and "scary" commies will take over and the word socialism is a sin.

Stephen Miller would disagree.

[Felya]

Stephen Miller would disagree.

So... did you read animal farm? I’m interested in what you think Orwell thought of communist revolution.

- - - Updated - - -

Reminds of the time a burner account tried to claim that Christopher Hitchens would have supported Trump because of his previous opposition to Clinton. Nevermind the fact that everything Hitchens (and Orwell for that matter) ever wrote was in opposition to totalitarianism and fascism.

If ideology is the only thing you care about, it's easy to ignore the enemy in plain sight and ramble on about how impure your allies are.

This wasn’t even that bad for people completely missing the point Orwell was making... for yesterday. There were a couple of people claiming that Orwell would protect fascist. I had the pleasure of telling a communist and a fascism defender, that Orwell wouldn’t be siding with them.

It’s like they have an idea that Orwell is a righteous libertarian, thus believe he stands up for opinions of communists and fascist.

- - - Updated - - -

You can't get rid of Trump. Its vastly more likely Trump is about to get rid of the democrats.

Yeah, and if he can’t, he’ll just file for bankruptcy to make it a tax payer problem... wait... that won’t work. Hhmmm... I got it...

Let’s see you try getting rid of Trump, when you can’t get in his bunker. It’s been inspected and democrats can’t get in to remove him.

Oh and I think I know how democrats will succeed in removing him... turn off White House wifi...

And even if you got rid of Trump, you'd just get someone worse.

Not possible... there is no worse than Trump.

Reagan used to be the biggest evil to democrats until Newt Gingrich came along. Then Newt suddenly became a minor issue when George W. Bush came along and they called Bush a war criminal. Now Bush is a minor issue compared to Trump. It just keeps getting worse. But I don't think you can get rid of Trump. Decades of hardline actions have destroyed trust and pushed the electorate to him.

Yeah, it’s as if acting President, gets more scrutiny, than when they are a civilian. But, the idea of GOP getting progressively worse is hilarious... You just found the one way that GOP is progressive. Sorry that democrats are not so consistent that they blamed everything on Hillary for 20 years... her being a civilian is irrelevant. lol

And apparently the democrats think the answer is to force their cultural views on a tribal people who are free and strong enough to fight back effectively. AND the democrats are in the minority opinion in the sphere of the conflict. By a LOT. The democrats are vastly outnumbered, vastly outgunned, and are provoking that majority with a stick. This is NOT how to resolve the social and political problems.

Democrats won by 3 million votes in the last election, with Trump’s support falling below 40%, to the point Trump threatened to sue... like issued a letter, where CNN responded with ‘go fuck your self’. With numerous examples of your Hawaiian shirt wearing boogaloos and full clan hooded anti protestors, running away more scared than your bunker inspector president... I think Trump’s support relies on shooting up schools, churches and mosques. They are too scared to confront people... have you looked at their gear during “Open up” protests? They will shoot each other, because it’s so ill fitting, that their gear will act like a straight jacket, making them fall on their faces... as soon as any quick movement is required.

The silent majority is marching in the streets... your boogaloos are too busy getting their hair done.