2020 US Presidential Election Speculation

Discuss events that have an impact on you and the world today. A home for honest, serious, and open discussion.

Re: 2020 US Presidential Election Speculation

Unread postby Lord Yang Jiahua » Mon Jan 13, 2020 6:19 pm

Shikanosuke does a far better job of articulating than I do, or perhaps its because i've been goaded into a format of don't say anything abrasive because of my Graduate School classes, that kinda thing gets you on notice in there.
Hansheng wrote:
What Iran (and US till now) have been doing against each other is far from ideal but normal practise in foriegn policy and warfare. Outright and blatantly assassinating a general of a sovereign state that your not actually at war with (in proxy war, hostile but not full blown war) is beyond the norm.

We are not in a proxy war, not anymore. Oh, to be sure, they used Iraqi nationals, but it was Soleimani that was responsible. He made himself a legitimate target. That was the point, we don't care much for proxies, we care about the people calling the shots, as well we should. Beyond the norm? Good. Its time for people to understand the consequences of attacking us.
[/quote]

We're an empire and need to show that from time to time. Proxy War or not, we still have tons of commitments around the world that vastly overextend the national budget and keep us at a 20 trillion dollar deficit. I don't think Iran needs to be reminded that it'll militarily be flattened if it does anything major.

Hansheng wrote:
Doing it changes things for a lot of countries. Your allies are also worried and their troops put in danger, is that good? Your enemies now can do similar things to US since the line has been crossed, is that a good thing?

But our allies troops aren't in danger are they? The Iranian government seems by all appearances to understand our position perfectly well. We might let a bit of property damage slide if they feel the need to throw a temper tantrum, but the instant they harm an actual person we will tun them into cinders.
When your not at war, the ramifications of what will follow and what has been done makes it hard to see (bar "about to press the nuke") where it would ever be a good idea

What would your answer to the attack on the embassy be? Do nothing? A pointless attack on a low value target? Ramifications don't just apply to one side. Taking out Soleimani was a very measured response and sent the correct message. The Iranian government needs to fear us because its the only think that will actually keep us safe.
The question is how they will do it, what level they are willing to do it at and what is the risk that this leads to a series of hostile acts from both sides that furthers instability. Not if they will do something

Well, that question is answered. They won't do anything of consequence. 20 some-odd missiles and not so much as a scratch on out troops? They obviously got the message, loud and clear. They're not willing to do anything that will place our troops in serious danger because they know we will kill them. Do we even know for sure if those were rockets were armed with live warheads? Nice fireworks show though.

Top Iranian general dead, no substantial damage to us. Iran is made to look incompetent and ineffectual. I'd call that a victory.
[/quote]

If Iran nuked something, well, thats an international war directly on them by everyone.

People like Henry Kissinger will tell you that Iran as a rogue theocratic state is the reason its a problem, it simply refuses to be part of world politics post-1800 essentially, (He'd say Treaty of Westphalia 1648) (Kissinger,World Order)
Trump could have done nothing, and nothing would have happened. Although it seems stirring up stuff in the region created unrest for Iran at home, that they already had. Ineffectual?
The response by Iran was equally bad, singe a few carpets and call it retaliation, unless theres some major piece of info the world is missing (like an operable nuke) this only shows weakness.
I don't understand why Iraqis would want to exchange one overlord for another, and then put themselves in the middle of a new war when Iran inevitably threatens Saudi Arabia directly, rather than by proxy.
"We Will Show Wu The Meaning of Fear!"-Cao Cao in DW6
"Politicians Are all the same all over, They Promise to build a bridge even when theres no river"-Nikita Khrushchev
User avatar
Lord Yang Jiahua
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 1139
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 6:24 pm
Location: Well....Not entirely sure if its America anymore

Re: 2020 US Presidential Election Speculation

Unread postby Shikanosuke » Mon Jan 13, 2020 7:47 pm

Jordan wrote: I also don't believe the government's talking point about an imminent threat coming from Soleimani. They have presented no evidence to justify this whatsoever.


And per usual so many Americans just don't care. We just won't get answers.

Even if the imminent threat argument could be corroborated, I also think the action was overtly illegal, though I think Congress has abrogated its ability to declare war for decades at this point. It has basically blindly allowed the executive branch to do what it wants. Nonetheless, I think the decision to initiate an act of war toward Iran should have received Congressional approval.


I completely agree with you on this. I believe last decade, beginning before that of course, we saw Congress' decline of importance as a check on executive action. The device of declaring war has become passe, and after September 11th, we saw the AUMF take its place. With that, we largely saw the reality that the executive will likely never need to return for Congress unless they wish to. I think the next decade or so will demonstrate the weakening of the judiciary's independence.
User avatar
Shikanosuke
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 4422
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 2:22 am
Location: US

Re: 2020 US Presidential Election Speculation

Unread postby Lord Yang Jiahua » Tue Jan 14, 2020 3:44 am

Shikanosuke wrote:
Jordan wrote: I also don't believe the government's talking point about an imminent threat coming from Soleimani. They have presented no evidence to justify this whatsoever.


And per usual so many Americans just don't care. We just won't get answers.

Even if the imminent threat argument could be corroborated, I also think the action was overtly illegal, though I think Congress has abrogated its ability to declare war for decades at this point. It has basically blindly allowed the executive branch to do what it wants. Nonetheless, I think the decision to initiate an act of war toward Iran should have received Congressional approval.


I completely agree with you on this. I believe last decade, beginning before that of course, we saw Congress' decline of importance as a check on executive action. The device of declaring war has become passe, and after September 11th, we saw the AUMF take its place. With that, we largely saw the reality that the executive will likely never need to return for Congress unless they wish to. I think the next decade or so will demonstrate the weakening of the judiciary's independence.


*Points at War Powers Act*

Yeah, its quite correct, we just won't get answers. Americans aren't dumb and they know what the usual cliches, run arounds, and answers look like. This would then make it that by voting for the people who usually do this, a simple act of robotics. Vote and Pray? Vote for the promises the will never be fulfilled? Maybe out of a stubborness of its the best system we got (Democracy).

The irony of the current American Political dialogue between "left" and right punditry (the former now incorporating Ultra Political Correctness for some reason) is that i don't think anyone actually reads what the other side is saying. Ive read stories off of Fox News quite a lot and find most of the comments to be pretty tame and frank, of course there are a few zanies left and right preaching this or that conspiracy and certain stories are usually suspect to being "bait" for the audiences to comment on.

Im more disappointed on the lack of Journalism when the stories resemble a tabloid piece and provide no significant details on whatever the subject is.

I used to ritualistically turn on CNN for the past 2 years , until about 3 months ago, when everything just go patently boring and predictable.

We are being saturated with news, i just think people are less objectively critical than ever.

Mainly. one would think, and especially for me as Professional Historian in Training, that we were suddenly in some significant historical moment akin to the election of Nixon in 68 or 72' (aka The Goddamned President). Instead it just looks like what i grew up in, Bush II with a different attitude and lack of brains around the head guy (i.e no Cheney) . You could say, "youve gone numb to it all" No, not really, it just seems like we're creeping up(slowly) on that "End of History" cliche, but as Jameson put it "with a vengence" i.e there isnt a definitive End to anything.

If Trump actually had deswamped the place, and followed through on actually making America Great (How bout them Internal Improvments there Donnie?) i'd say hey, he did his job, he really turned out to be a decent President.
Instead he hid out while the Mueller report (why give it to an incapable Republican stooge from the 90's i don't know) was running the presses, and then immediately hid again when impeachment came out. Nothing moved, except some apparent pocket lining for his corporate comrades in various industries.

He came out today for the BCS National Championship, looked quite good, and was different, less robotic in his Imperial duty to open the national gladiator game (i.e turned to wave when USA started getting chanted).
"We Will Show Wu The Meaning of Fear!"-Cao Cao in DW6
"Politicians Are all the same all over, They Promise to build a bridge even when theres no river"-Nikita Khrushchev
User avatar
Lord Yang Jiahua
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 1139
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 6:24 pm
Location: Well....Not entirely sure if its America anymore

Re: 2020 US Presidential Election Speculation

Unread postby Jordan » Wed Jan 15, 2020 11:15 pm

I actually occasionally watch Fox News or even Ben Shapiro or people I strongly disagree with myself. If nothing else, it's at least good to know what the other side thinks. And I'll often agree with somebody like Tucker Carlson, though it depends on what issue is being talked about of course.

This Warren/Sanders feud is easily the most toxic thing to come out of the entire Democratic primary. Congrats to CNN on getting their wish in having the two finally break their NAP and fight. It may be good for ratings and it may result in CNN getting their wish for a more centrist candidate to get nominated as the Democratic choice for President. The feud has, however, caused irreparable damage within the Democratic party, making it look more likely than ever that Trump will be re-elected easily due to bad blood among the coalition that makes up his opposition. If you saw #NeverWarren trending on Twitter last night or a lot of snake emojis, or a lot of people on her side of the fence screaming about Russian bots, sexism and trolls, you know what I'm talking about. Disaster.

Aside from CNN instigating, aiding and abetting hostility between the two candidates, the debate they put on was also miserable. The moderators debated and argued more with the candidates than the candidates argued with each other. They might as well have had Donald Trump or Ted Cruz moderate the debate. Questions were framed in such a way that rather than challenging candidates on weak points, CNN just outright asserted hostile conservative opinions as facts. For example, instead of asking a question like, "Will pulling out of Iraq lead to a power vacuum and the emergence of hostile forces in the region?" which would be a reasonable (and tough) question, they asked a question along the lines of, "You know the Ayatollah wants to pull out of Iraq and you agree with that, so you support the Ayatollah, and also pulling out of Iraq led to the birth of ISIS?" (paraphrasing) To Buttigieg a question was posed that suggested he supported Iran getting nuclear weapons. In another question, they asserted that he has no support among black voters and asked him whether it's possible black people have looked at him and decided to move on. First of all, that point is completely substanceless in terms of policy, and secondly, it's more like an attack than a question. I don't even like Buttigieg, but these examples go to show how absurd the framing was. I desperately hope CNN never hosts another debate ever again. I'll take even Fox News and even OAN or the Onion over them at this point, gladly.
User avatar
Jordan
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 5986
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 4:52 am

Re: 2020 US Presidential Election Speculation

Unread postby Kongde » Thu Jan 16, 2020 5:02 pm

Jordan wrote:Aside from CNN instigating, aiding and abetting hostility between the two candidates, the debate they put on was also miserable. The moderators debated and argued more with the candidates than the candidates argued with each other. They might as well have had Donald Trump or Ted Cruz moderate the debate. Questions were framed in such a way that rather than challenging candidates on weak points, CNN just outright asserted hostile conservative opinions as facts. For example, instead of asking a question like, "Will pulling out of Iraq lead to a power vacuum and the emergence of hostile forces in the region?" which would be a reasonable (and tough) question, they asked a question along the lines of, "You know the Ayatollah wants to pull out of Iraq and you agree with that, so you support the Ayatollah, and also pulling out of Iraq led to the birth of ISIS?" (paraphrasing) To Buttigieg a question was posed that suggested he supported Iran getting nuclear weapons. In another question, they asserted that he has no support among black voters and asked him whether it's possible black people have looked at him and decided to move on. First of all, that point is completely substanceless in terms of policy, and secondly, it's more like an attack than a question. I don't even like Buttigieg, but these examples go to show how absurd the framing was. I desperately hope CNN never hosts another debate ever again. I'll take even Fox News and even OAN or the Onion over them at this point, gladly.


The main issue with that is that they automatically said "You support this" - instead of asking "Do you support this" - basically, forcing upon them issues they may or may not have ever actually supported or said. This was the most biased debate I've ever seen with the worst questions possible - some of them more literal jabs at the person that were phrased into a question (but they were still an intentional jab). There was nothing unbiased about this debate. Things like this just reinforce to people what Donald Trump is constantly saying - "Fake news." May CNN reap what they sow here - their reputation will be tarnished as the Fox news of the Left.
?-Kongde-?
User avatar
Kongde
Student
 
Posts: 114
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 5:59 am

Re: 2020 US Presidential Election Speculation

Unread postby agga » Thu Jan 16, 2020 5:15 pm

re the CNN debate, and others before, (I don't watch these things, find it too painful, but I read about them afterwards), on the one hand it's really frustrating how dumb and leading the questions can be. but on the other hand, it's only going to get worse as the year grinds on, and it's good to get ready for it. the knives are going to come out eventually. candidates are going to get asked these "when did you stop beating your wife" questions, and they need to be good at responding clearly and cleverly to that kind of stuff... debates aren't really debates, anymore, they're tests.
造反有理!
User avatar
agga
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 1081
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2003 6:45 pm

Re: 2020 US Presidential Election Speculation

Unread postby Jordan » Fri Jan 17, 2020 1:58 am

I think Warren, and CNN, backfired.

-CNNisTrash, CNNisGarbage and various other related trends appeared on Twitter and other social media. Other news outlets also piled onto CNN.

-Warren got spammed to hell and back with snake emojis on Twitter while numerous anti-Warren hashtags cropped up. Other hashtags trended which supported Sanders.

-Most recent Reuters/Ipsos poll shows Sanders gaining (leading at 20%) and Warren going nowhere (third at 12%) nationally.

-Sanders also managed to raise millions of dollars following the debate. He raised 1.7 mil on the day of the debate, which was more than he has ever gotten on a debate day of this cycle.

I think Sanders will win this nomination.
User avatar
Jordan
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 5986
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 4:52 am

Re: 2020 US Presidential Election Speculation

Unread postby Jordan » Tue Feb 04, 2020 5:14 am

This caucus was singlehandedly the most incompetent, shameful thing I have ever seen in American electoral politics. Caucuses are a complete disaster and should never be held again. The Democrats have bungled their chances of winning an election straight from the start.

What SEEMS true is that Buttigieg and Sanders were big winners, Warren did ok, Yang/Klobuchar/Steyer went nowhere, and Biden had a disastrous night. The DNC, Iowa, and the caucus process are the biggest losers though. Trump is a big winner because nobody will trust the results that come out of Iowa now. The Democrats will fight over this unacceptable result for weeks. There are some rumors that one of the apps that was used for this election had connections to Buttigieg's campaign, which makes all this even more suspicious.
User avatar
Jordan
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 5986
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 4:52 am

Re: 2020 US Presidential Election Speculation

Unread postby Hansheng » Tue Feb 04, 2020 7:20 am

This caucus was singlehandedly the most incompetent, shameful thing I have ever seen in American electoral politics. Caucuses are a complete disaster and should never be held again. The Democrats have bungled their chances of winning an election straight from the start.

What SEEMS true is that Buttigieg and Sanders were big winners, Warren did ok, Yang/Klobuchar/Steyer went nowhere, and Biden had a disastrous night. The DNC, Iowa, and the caucus process are the biggest losers though. Trump is a big winner because nobody will trust the results that come out of Iowa now. The Democrats will fight over this unacceptable result for weeks. There are some rumors that one of the apps that was used for this election had connections to Buttigieg's campaign, which makes all this even more suspicious.

Absolutely, this was biggest train wreck I've seen since the Florida fiasco back in 2000. While I'm an implacable enemy of the democratic party, I can't help but feel terrible for the people that came out to vote, they deserved a fair process at least. Their leaders are failing them on every level. Trump is never going to let anyone forget tonight, he will mock them into oblivion.
Hansheng
Apprentice
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 10:12 pm

Re: 2020 US Presidential Election Speculation

Unread postby Sun Fin » Wed Feb 05, 2020 7:51 pm

What do you guys think of Romney’s decision to break ranks from the rest of the party?
Have a question about a book or academic article before you buy it? Maybe I have it!
Check out my library here for a list of Chinese history resources I have on hand and my tumblr to see if I have reviewed it!
User avatar
Sun Fin
Librarian of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 7902
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2007 9:20 pm
Location: Vicar Factory

PreviousNext

Return to Current Affairs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests

Copyright © 2002–2008 Kongming’s Archives. All Rights Reserved