[OFF TOPIC] Politics Thread

[Olympian1010 7,975]

12 minutes ago, Monzanator said:

 

Not really. I don't recall USA having ration stamps during peacetime like Poland between 1976-1989  

We didn’t true, but the inequality, class struggle, and terrible economies are the same.

[Monzanator 4,502]

3 minutes ago, Olympian1010 said:

We didn’t true, but the inequality, class struggle, and terrible economies are the same.

 

Because no political system will fix it. There will always be class struggle, reach & poor, white collars and blue collars and so on. The only difference is the percentage of people who belong to which class.

 

1% of the world's population owns 80% of its material wealth or sth like that. Yep, it's as inequal as it gets regardless of the political system

[Olympian1010 7,975]

8 minutes ago, Monzanator said:

 

Because no political system will fix it. There will always be class struggle, reach & poor, white collars and blue collars and so on. The only difference is the percentage of people who belong to which class.

 

1% of the world's population owns 80% of its material wealth or sth like that. Yep, it's as inequal as it gets regardless of the political system

Yes, there we agree. Their will always be inequality and class struggle. I don’t think any system of government will fix that, but I believe it’s our duty to find the one the best curbs the problem.

[AmericanHero40 213]

@Olympian1010 so from all the talk about trump and elections you missed the one that actually should be on this forum, he is in L.A today discussing the 2028 olympics, or is there a LA2028 board where it will go? 

[Olympian1010 7,975]

6 minutes ago, Maxim Fastovsky said:

@Olympian1010 so from all the talk about trump and elections you missed the one that actually should be on this forum, he is in L.A today discussing the 2028 olympics, or is there a LA2028 board where it will go? 

I think he’s just meeting with the LOC to discuss the games. Obviously he’ll have no role in the games, but I think LA 2028 just wanted to give the government an update.

[AmericanHero40 213]

Just now, Olympian1010 said:

I think he’s just meeting with the LOC to discuss the games. Obviously he’ll have no role in the games, but I think LA 2028 just wanted to give the government an update.

 

Maybe his son will run in 2024  wont that be awesome? haha

 

But yes he just wanted to get an update

[LowerSaxony 205]

15 hours ago, Olympian1010 said:

Oh I agree. However, Bloomberg isn’t changing the status quo of US politics. To me, four more years of Trump or four years Bloomberg, will yield similar results. In every test I’ve done Bloomberg’s been the last democratic candidate before Trump (in terms of who aligns with me). Plus, if Trump is relected, I see the chances of having a progressive as president even higher. We might also finally get a vote on Californian Independence then, which is something I’m in a favor of.

 

Well, wasting your vote for a 0.00001% chance of Californian independence, that's rather optimistic Without California and its delegates the US remainder is deemed to have Republicans in office btw.

 

I really do not think that Bloomberg will handle foreign affairs like Trump. Bloomberg is able to oversee the consequences of what he is doing, while Trump isn't. Regarding the election, I see the problem that Trump has already won if Democrats refuse to elect the Dem candidate just because it isn't the candidate they favored in pre-elections. If some voters wouldn't have been so stupid to vote for Nader in 2000, the world would have been spared eight years of Bush/Chaney.

[Olympian1010 7,975]

19 minutes ago, LowerSaxony said:

 

Well, wasting your vote for a 0.00001% chance of Californian independence, that's rather optimistic Without California and its delegates the US remainder is deemed to have Republicans in office btw.

 

I really do not think that Bloomberg will handle foreign affairs like Trump. Bloomberg is able to oversee the consequences of what he is doing, while Trump isn't. Regarding the election, I see the problem that Trump has already won if Democrats refuse to elect the Dem candidate just because it isn't the candidate they favored in pre-elections. If some voters wouldn't have been so stupid to vote for Nader in 2000, the world would have been spared eight years of Bush/Chaney.

California Independence has actually been polled around 30-40% in favor during the 2018 election (at least that’s what I remember reading). California is slowly becoming American Scotland. It’s more liberal than the rest of the country (save New Mexico, the Northeast), and it enjoys a good economy (4th largest in the world (we passed the UK recently)). As I’ve said before, most Californians will tell you they’re Californian before they’re American. 

I wouldn’t be sure of that. I don’t think Bloomberg would support the foreign policy that the party wants too. I think he’d make some classic American fuckups, as where Sanders votes against most of the wars and military interventions. 
 

I’d say Trump likes his chances of winning at this point. Progressives and Moderates cannibalizing each other in the primary, creating some very unhappy losers. It’s going to take a lot to unite the party, but we won’t know that for sure until we get to the DNC Convention.

[Olympian1010 7,975]

Damn, you know it’s bad when Norway, Sweden, Iceland, Denmark, or Switzerland aren’t even doing it right 

 

 

Does anyone ever wonder what the world would be like if coin tries really listened to what the UN says? I feel like we’d be in such a better place right now.

[LowerSaxony 205]

33 minutes ago, Olympian1010 said:

California Independence has actually been polled around 30-40% in favor during the 2018 election (at least that’s what I remember reading). California is slowly becoming American Scotland. It’s more liberal than the rest of the country (save New Mexico, the Northeast), and it enjoys a good economy (4th largest in the world (we passed the UK recently)). As I’ve said before, most Californians will tell you they’re Californian before they’re American. 

I wouldn’t be sure of that. I don’t think Bloomberg would support the foreign policy that the party wants too. I think he’d make some classic American fuckups, as where Sanders votes against most of the wars and military interventions. 
 

I’d say Trump likes his chances of winning at this point. Progressives and Moderates cannibalizing each other in the primary, creating some very unhappy losers. It’s going to take a lot to unite the party, but we won’t know that for sure until we get to the DNC Convention.

 

It's still a difference having 30% in favor for independence in voting polls and the actual probability for that to happen. I mean, would be a referendum be in line with the American constitution? If the Californians vote for independence, will Washington simply accept the independence? Especially, when CA is responsible for a high share of the US economic power? These are the questions, which actually determine the probability of independence. At the moment, it looks that even Scotland won't have another independence referendum as it won't be allowed from London.

 

And yes, I am pretty sure that Blloomberg will be far from being the perfect president. But, the world is used to cope with regular American fuckups However, the frequency of those fuckups has been increased fatally since 2016 - so it would actually be a healing time when the world only needs to handle the familiar amount of fuckups.

Edited February 19, 2020 by LowerSaxony