Kamala is really underperforming.
Yeah, and Brownās not a centristā¦ But I think they find Liz and Bernie unacceptable and want a liberal they find acceptable to take them out.
This is a bad take on the Middle East. If thereās anything weāve learned from the Arab Spring and itās aftermath itās that what replaces a dictatorship usually isnāt a democracy. Honestly Iād be with Tulsi on this if she wasnāt so obviously parroting Russian talking points while being anti LGBT. I think the era of America world police needs to end ASAP. Other countries need to handle their own security/political issues without our direct involvement. If the people in those places want Democracy it wonāt be subtle and theyāll get their way (see HK).
To be clear I think HK is going to ultimately triumph over China. It might take a decade or two and thereās a very good chance they send in the tanks this timeā¦ but if they do that the āterrorismā will start and it will get very ugly and very expensive. Eventually theyāll give up. If they kill a bunch of those protesters all theyāll do is radicalize the population and kick off a real rebellion in HK with guns and bombs.
I just donāt think itās realistic that we have some special insight into how to fix other parts of the world. I donāt think us sending more guns into volatile situations ever makes the situation better, and I think our support actually undermines a lot of the groups we help because it induces them to overextend and over rely on our support. Also we have a terrible track record of being able to tell who the good guys are.
Bottom line is that the people of other countries should decide how those countries are run. We should respect their opinion about the best way to operate their own countries. If weāre going to intervene it should be to prevent a mass slaughter and we should go as gently as humanly possibleā¦ but even then our track record isnāt great. When other countries do stuff we find disgusting we should levy massive sanctions on them wrt trade and call it a day. We donāt have to contribute to whatever evil shit they are doing, but direct intervention is something weāre addicted to and need to quit.
1 Like
Yeah, definitely. Iāve been surprised.
I havenāt been. There was a time when her background as a prosecutor would have been great for her political career. That time has passed. I suspect that law enforcement from 1950-2025 isnāt going to look good in the history books, and I suspect that the end of that era is already upon us.
How many regimes get overthrown without outside assistance?
I also think itās quite callous to sit here in the comfort of our own homes and declare those people should live under a brutal dictatorship for a few more decades before they are allowed freedom. If they really want it they can bootstrap their way to democracy.
Thatās not going to happen. China will never relent. It would set a very dangerous precedent.
She does a reasonably good job of defending herself as a liberal, if not progressive, prosecutor.
Why would I rank her below Mayor Pete? She is also very smart, she is pretty close on the political spectrum, and sheās significantly more experienced and qualified.
Yeah Iām not saying she was ever my favorite, or close, I just expected her to be a more formidable opponent for my candidates than she has been.
JFC. These people arenāt deciding how their country is run. Thatās kind of a feature of a dictatorship.
1 Like
Speaking of China, we could be arming the Uyghurs. What could go wrong?
2 Likes
Thatās not true. A dictator never truly rules alone. A dictator absolutely depends on the support of a bunch of power brokers who themselves depend on people below them. The second that support collapses they usually end up dead or exiled.
The common people absolutely do not have a voice in the government, but if they ever get riled up enough the dictator is done. This whole process is in the process of happening in Sudan of all places right now lol.
But letās take Saddam Hussein real quick. Saddam kept Iraq under control by ruling with an iron fist supported by his Baath Party and all the infrastructure that came with it. He killed, on average, 50k people a year. Has anyone since managed to keep control of Iraq by killing fewer? Iād argue no. Saddam was a product of his environment purpose built to be the guy in charge of that country. They havenāt had a leader of his quality or capability since he fell and have been much the worse for it.
To be clear Iraq is a mess of a country created by colonialists, but Saddam was the organic leader of that mess and it turns out was governing in a way that was close to optimal for that mess. After he died the country would have no doubt fallen into a massive civil war which probably would have ended the concept of the country called Iraq. That all would have taken place without our intervention, and we absolutely shouldnāt have intervened. The world would be a better place.
I honestly canāt think of a single military engagement weāve been involved in that didnāt involve liberating recently conquered people and immediately giving them control of their country back that wasnāt a complete and total disaster. Every time we engage and arenāt 100% on the side of what the local population wants (and historically we suck at judging that) it turns into a quagmire that gets a lot of people hurt for zero gain.
Iām for intervening to stop genocides, but even that canāt be done without a real government with popular support already in place to support. And then we could usually just give them air cover until the invaders returned to their own territory and it would be optimal.
What do you hate religious freedom and love Chinese authoritarianism? Donāt be a pussy, letās start those arms shipments.
1 Like
Yeah, Warren has a well-known history of such things. The question is whether or not sheās had a legitimate change of heart. Iād be more concerned about minor problems that are recent, then major problems from the early 90s.
Oh, come on.
But all those people rank Trump ahead of her. The only people who prefer her to Trump and all the other dems are weirdo non establishment people who claim to be left wingers.
They were never going to vote for a Democrat that could win a primary anyway. Third party people are the worst IME. Itās not because I think they are wrong that we desperately need more parties, itās that they know they arenāt going to win and are just casting their vote as a protest. Fine I guess, but functionally the same as staying home.
The need for new parties wonāt be addressed until we get ranked choice voting at a minimum. If what they want is more parties they should become single issue voters on the subject of election reforms.
Also a lot of Mayor Pete hate over at chiefsplanet, though for very different reasons.
My guess is they really hate him because heās not just an establishment Democrat but also gay and a veteran. Thereās a reason there are so many old pictures of black men lynched in their army uniforms. Nothing makes those kinds of people angrier than people they have low expectations of exceeding them. They definitely hate the idea of a gay man being strong, competent, and most assuredly capable of beating them into a coma.
Still actively dislike Pete. But not because heās gay, a veteran, or any of the rest of that. Still a narrowly focused dislike lol.
They just hate him cuz heās gay, the military thing doesnāt even enter the equation.