politics thread

[Wezil]

More voter fraud and you guessed it.... another Republican.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/05/politics/new-hampshire-candidate-voted-two-states/index.html

[Buster Crabbe's Uncle]

It always is these days...

[BeBMan]

Is it more historic to have the US Senate confirming a black woman as judge for the Supreme Court along mostly partisan lines (with 3 exceptions from the GOP) or have the same senate voting to downgrade Russia's trade status with a 100-0 result?

[Wezil]

I don't think we have an AusPol thread.

Elections called in Australia.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/10/australia/australia-elections-may-morrison-intl-hnk/index.html

[BeBMan]

Today's also France. But IIRC it's tradtition to only decide this in the 2nd round, so unless there's a surprise today the results are somewhat away still.

[Wezil]

Today's also France. But IIRC it's tradtition to only decide this in the 2nd round, so unless there's a surprise today the results are somewhat away still.

Ah yes. This could be important.

I don't follow French politics but appears the far right is challenging (again).

[Buster Crabbe's Uncle]

I don't have a real problem with the right, as such. I'm essentially a social conservative myself, and have sympathy to libertarian ideas/ideals. -But the FAR right, I want to shoot in the face - it's a proto-fascist movement popping up all over the first world, looking to ruin it for everyone.

[Wezil]

I describe myself as a "reasonable libertarian". I recognize that we live in a society and that concessions must be made by all in order for it all to work. So long as conservatives stay away from the "social" stuff I'm generally okay with them. My problem with social conservatives is their never ending desire to make the rest of us conform to their belief system in areas where quite frankly the government should steer clear of.

[Buster Crabbe's Uncle]

Society doesn't work if we don't cooperate to an extent - getting in line at the back like you're supposed to, braking for pedestrians, and so on. We have to exert ourselves a little to try to stay out of each other's way. "Love may fail, but courtesy shall prevail" as Kurt Vonnegut Jr. put it. I try to stifle my annoyance when whomever generates PC terminology comes up with something awkward - it's just decent manners to call people what they ask to be called, though calling Bruce Jenner in a dress Caitlin is a tough one.

I'm not so big-hearted that I don't judge and disapprove ALL the time of other people's kinks and peculiarities - but it's almost never any of my business, and I have a duty as a decent person and a citizen, alike, to try to make my reservations one one else's problem. I'm responsible for my shortcomings, not theirs. And I also see who conducts business via bad-mouthing, blaming the other side, and constant, constant lies. Thus, I share many of the reactionaries' concerns, but if those guys are for it, I'm voting against it. That is the great phail of the Reagan Revolution.

[Wezil]

The issue of "pronouns" is contentious in my field of work where arguments over "compelled" speech are being made. Like you I have no real issue with referring to people in their preferred way but it does add confusion to the language in a field where words and their exact meanings matter. As retirement is on the horizon for me, I hope to sidestep the whole issue quite frankly.

Social conservatives that live by but don't enforce their beliefs on others (as you seem to be) are fine. I'm libertarian enough to let people live their lives as they see fit. My lifestyle isn't exactly something most people would want but it works for me.

[Buster Crabbe's Uncle]

We NEED the small-government conservatives in there dragging their heels against overspending and waste and bureaucracy - we do. History demonstrates that they're not wrong, for all the good collective efforts by society can accomplish. -But that is not what the Reagan movement, the Cheney Bund, or the T-party stand or ever stood for, which is Give The Bossmen What They Want; the social conservative stuff is just frosting for the suckers. They always eventually lose on those issues, as the world moves into the future one day at a time.

The US conservative party was hijacked by statist reactionaries circa 1980, and is now the opposite of actually conservative...

[-Jrabbit]

This is true.

[Wezil]

Don't kid yourself - Both main US parties are corporatist. It is the same here.

Edit - Our Conservative Premier (state governor for you) has been tripping over himself handing out corporate welfare checks in the leadup to the June provincial election. He's doing it hand in hand with the Liberal PM. I have a hard time believing that Ford Motor et. al. really need the money...

[Uncle Sparky]

Liberal/Tory
Same old story.

[Buster Crabbe's Uncle]

Oh, the last governor of my state was basically working for Duke Power. He was an actual former employee. That's Pat McCrory, who got a lot of embarrassing-to-NC national attention for being a bigot who was hypocritical when it came to local government, the trans bathroom thing. -But his bigger sin, in my book, was shilling for Boss Duke, which owns about a third of the state, and wants to get out of paying for its own pollution cleanups.

No, I've come to agree with the Euros and so on who assert that the US has a conservative party and a reactionary party. The social liberal stuff is mostly frosting for the suckers, and Biden, Obama and the Clintons are Eisenhower Republicans in disguise.

[giblets]

The issue of "pronouns" is contentious in my field of work where arguments over "compelled" speech are being made. Like you I have no real issue with referring to people in their preferred way but it does add confusion to the language in a field where words and their exact meanings matter. As retirement is on the horizon for me, I hope to sidestep the whole issue quite frankly.

Social conservatives that live by but don't enforce their beliefs on others (as you seem to be) are fine. I'm libertarian enough to let people live their lives as they see fit. My lifestyle isn't exactly something most people would want but it works for me.

Why is it confusing? Are you talking about some people wanting to be referred to as "they"?

[Wezil]

Why is it confusing? Are you talking about some people wanting to be referred to as "they"?

Yes, "they" and "them" when referring to a singular person is a good example.

[Uncle Sparky]

Thou art a wanker!

[Uncle Sparky]

"The courier was here. They dropped off a parcel."

What does that sentence mean? I need to know if the courier has a penis!

[Buster Crabbe's Uncle]

-Isn't it thou ART?