United States Politics Thread 47

[Raphael]

Thank you. Good to hear that.

[jcb]

It's never quite this simple-- you could certainly say that the EU is not ready for a major war. But neither is Russia. Russia has lost about 6000 armored vehicles including tanks, 250,000 soldiers killed. In the last year and a half Russia has occupied 1% of Ukraine's territory.

Indeed, not to diminish the very significant amount of vehicles that Russia has lost, which includes half of *all* the tanks they inherited from the Soviet Union ( https://youtu.be/K8CcuVCDEUw?si=ACM1GMLoia4ifZ6f&t=303 ), but the item that Europe (and America) is most likely to lag in production behind Russia (and Ukraine) is drones, which have become hugely important ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRRYmT6hhQA ).

( https://isis-online.org/isis-reports/vi ... ction-site )

[zompist]

Drones are way more important than people realized in 2021. However, Ukraine manufactured 2 million droens last year, and is aiming for 4.5 million this year. Drones are now responsible for 2/3 of Russian combat deaths.

“The main reason for the lack of success remains the enemy’s air dominance,” a Russian military blogger around Chasiv Yar complained in a recent missive translated by Estonian analyst WarTranslated. “Their reconnaissance drones are in the sky 24/7, and any movement on our part is immediately met with a massive wave of [first-person-view] drones.”

Russian infantry can’t leave their trenches. When they do, “we just lose people without achieving anything,” the blogger wrote. Any armored vehicles that break cover and expose themselves to the ever-present drones “essentially operate in a one-way manner,” the blogger added.

[Ketsuban]

Currently in my Bluesky feed is an article in the Wall Street Journal about the possibility that the US government might acquire a stake in Intel, which is in an ugly position right now as their new CEO Lip-Bu Tan has opted to throw away investments started by their predecessor Pat Gelsinger (claiming that they failed to find customers for the under-construction fabs) and put the company in what is likely to be a death spiral of cutting off one limb to pay the rent on another, in exchange for it receiving money it was allocated in the CHIPS Act.

[jcb]

Trump is hearing that he is "not doing well", and wants to get to heaven, "if possible".
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdIw_mPi_ps
- https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/19/us/p ... eaven.html

[jcb]

Trump wants to purge America's museums of saying too many bad things about slavery.
- https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-s ... =124788598

America is regressing. Gay marriage might get reversed soon.
- https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/supreme ... =124465302
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6n0ei_p6xI

Alot of Democrats may be rolling over for the Republicans, but Gavin Newsome, the governor of California, seems to understand the severity of the crisis, and is fighting fire with fire. He's pushing to redraw the districts of California after Texas is doing the same, and is imitating Trump's style of speech on X.
- https://www.foxnews.com/politics/obama- ... op-tactics
- https://x.com/GovPressOffice/status/1958276364873912559
- https://x.com/GovPressOffice
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gxuvg42BW0
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kverKiBp9Jw

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: The space of acceptable speech/acts is wider than Democrats think it is. They need to stop being restricted by their own imaginary self-imposed rules, and start fighting back.

[malloc]

Also, Texas just passed the gerrymandered legislative map just as I predicted would happen all along despite your objections. This represents an unmitigated disaster that all but guarantees the GOP will retain control of the house in 2026 and perhaps indefinitely. Despite that, I feel somewhat pleased to see my supposed doomerism vindicated.

[zompist]

Also, Texas just passed the gerrymandered legislative map just as I predicted would happen all along despite your objections. This represents an unmitigated disaster that all but guarantees the GOP will retain control of the house in 2026 and perhaps indefinitely. Despite that, I feel somewhat pleased to see my supposed doomerism vindicated.

Vindicated? You mean, the 2026 election already happened?

Oh, no, it's still 2025. You're just celebrating a Trump victory that hasn't happened. This is supposed to prove you're smart?

[keenir]

Also, Texas just passed the gerrymandered legislative map just as I predicted would happen all along despite your objections.

you didn't predict something "despite our objections" - you lamented that the gerrymandering was happening and you woe betide-ed that there were calls to arrest the legislators(sp) who left the state.

This represents an unmitigated disaster that all but guarantees

when someone says that, its usually to demonstrate the "all but" actually happening.

after all, even if the Republicans manage to hold those new districts, that doesn't mean that - of the Republicans who get elected there - that they will be friendlier to Trump than the Democrats presently there.

the GOP will retain control of the house in 2026 and perhaps indefinitely.

...with the same thing happening in California to entrench the Democrats.

Despite that, I feel somewhat pleased to see my supposed doomerism vindicated.

Well this is a first: usually you lament anything you take as proving you right.

[malloc]

you didn't predict something "despite our objections" - you lamented that the gerrymandering was happening and you woe betide-ed that there were calls to arrest the legislators(sp) who left the state.

Clearly though, I was predicting that the gerrymandering attempt would succeed while you and Zompist were predicting it would fail. You can't gaslight me on this.

after all, even if the Republicans manage to hold those new districts, that doesn't mean that - of the Republicans who get elected there - that they will be friendlier to Trump than the Democrats presently there.

Unless something truly unexpected happens between now and the election, they emphatically will. Republicans overwhelmingly support Trump and there is no reason to assume that will change anytime soon. We should assume based on current evidence that a Republican house majority will continue to back Trump, not that Republicans will suddenly turn against him without clear reason. Quite honestly, I think you are deliberately trying to frustrate me.

...with the same thing happening in California to entrench the Democrats.

Except that it requires voters to approve the new map, which is far from guaranteed. They may well disapprove of nakedly partisan gerrymanders or right wing forces could influence their vote through propaganda.

Vindicated? You mean, the 2026 election already happened?

Oh, no, it's still 2025. You're just celebrating a Trump victory that hasn't happened. This is supposed to prove you're smart?

Vindicated in that I predicted the gerrymander attempt would succeed when you said it would fail.

[keenir]

you didn't predict something "despite our objections" - you lamented that the gerrymandering was happening and you woe betide-ed that there were calls to arrest the legislators(sp) who left the state.

Clearly though, I was predicting that the gerrymandering attempt would succeed while you and Zompist were predicting it would fail. You can't gaslight me on this.

we don't need to, and we don't gaslight anyone. we're trying to drag you out of your self-gaslighting room.

after all, even if the Republicans manage to hold those new districts, that doesn't mean that - of the Republicans who get elected there - that they will be friendlier to Trump than the Democrats presently there.

Unless something truly unexpected happens between now and the election, they emphatically will. Republicans overwhelmingly support Trump and there is no reason to assume that will change anytime soon.

you're forgetting that people don't vote for unpopular options - any Republican who declared "I'm not with them" - and there are no few number of them - will enjoy the benefits of the gerrymandering, without the stink of associating with Trump.

We should assume based on current evidence that a Republican house majority will continue to back Trump, not that Republicans will suddenly turn against him without clear reason.

not even Cheney ever shot himself and others - in IRL or in jest - as much as Trump does. just because you don't care to notice opposition within or without the party, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Quite honestly, I think you are deliberately trying to frustrate me.

I'm not sure if you want me to give you a tiny violin here.

Except that it requires voters to approve the new map, which is far from guaranteed. They may well disapprove of nakedly partisan gerrymanders

...which is why, as Zomp pointed out, the California Governor is doing everything exactly as Texas did...with the exception of hunting down the other parties.

or right wing forces could influence their vote through propaganda.



Vindicated in that I predicted the gerrymander attempt would succeed when you said it would fail.

the gerrymandering succeeded...you predicted that it would benefit Trump 100%...that has yet to be demonstrated.

[malloc]

you're forgetting that people don't vote for unpopular options - any Republican who declared "I'm not with them" - and there are no few number of them - will enjoy the benefits of the gerrymandering, without the stink of associating with Trump.

You wildly overestimate the percentage of anti-Trump Republicans. It may not make sense to most people here, but tens of millions of people are utterly devoted to Trump and tens of millions more casually support him. There are vast swaths of the country where support for Trump is simply the unspoken norm.

the gerrymandering succeeded...you predicted that it would benefit Trump 100%...that has yet to be demonstrated.

It is you who need to demonstrate that the Republicans elected under the gerrymandered map will break with Trump. We should assume they will follow the established script of supporting Trump enthusiastically until contrary evidence appears.

[keenir]

EDIT: sorry, i didn't realize there was a problem with my prior post; fixed now.

you're forgetting that people don't vote for unpopular options - any Republican who declared "I'm not with them" - and there are no few number of them - will enjoy the benefits of the gerrymandering, without the stink of associating with Trump.

You wildly overestimate the percentage of anti-Trump Republicans. It may not make sense to most people here, but tens of millions of people are utterly devoted to Trump and tens of millions more casually support him. There are vast swaths of the country where support for Trump is simply the unspoken norm.

That was indeed the case...until Trump turned the face-eating leopards on them.

also, the "I'll lower the price of eggs" has not only failed to happen, but has in fact made the prices worse. that pisses MAGAlanders off immensely.

the gerrymandering succeeded...you predicted that it would benefit Trump 100%...that has yet to be demonstrated.

It is you who need to demonstrate that the Republicans elected under the gerrymandered map will break with Trump. We should assume they will follow the established script of supporting Trump enthusiastically until contrary evidence appears.

you mean like Republicans who speak against Trump?

[malloc]

That was indeed the case...until Trump turned the face-eating leopards on them.

also, the "I'll lower the price of eggs" has not only failed to happen, but has in fact made the prices worse. that pisses MAGAlanders off immensely.

I have lived my entire life in the heart of MAGA country and believe me when I say that nobody here is pissed off at Trump over rising prices. The only comments I've heard about this issue blame the Democrats and certainly not Trump. Most of the time I hear them cheering Trump and praising his policies. Several weeks ago the people at my workplace were celebrating his actions against Iran.

you mean like Republicans who speak against Trump?

So what? You can find minority dissenters in any group but that proves nothing about what the larger group thinks.

[zompist]

Vindicated? You mean, the 2026 election already happened?

Oh, no, it's still 2025. You're just celebrating a Trump victory that hasn't happened. This is supposed to prove you're smart?

Vindicated in that I predicted the gerrymander attempt would succeed when you said it would fail.

You are a damn liar. I said no such thing.

[keenir]

easy, Zompist, Malloc has a memory like Trump's.

That was indeed the case...until Trump turned the face-eating leopards on them.

also, the "I'll lower the price of eggs" has not only failed to happen, but has in fact made the prices worse. that pisses MAGAlanders off immensely.

I have lived my entire life in the heart of MAGA country and believe me

thats rather hard to do these days.

when I say that nobody here is pissed off at Trump over rising prices. The only comments I've heard about this issue blame the Democrats and certainly not Trump.

maybe get your head out of the echo chamber...since the comments you're claiming to hear, are not what any party - MAGA or otherwise - are saying anymore.

Most of the time I hear them cheering Trump and praising his policies. Several weeks ago the people at my workplace were celebrating his actions against Iran.

was that before or after it turned out the Trump-bombed facilities turned out to still be intact?

you mean like Republicans who speak against Trump?

So what? You can find minority dissenters in any group but that proves nothing about what the larger group thinks.

those "minority dissenters" will draw in the votes, swelling the ranks of districts (and ensuingly, larger bodies) with Republicans who don't care for Trump.

[malloc]

maybe get your head out of the echo chamber...since the comments you're claiming to hear, are not what any party - MAGA or otherwise - are saying anymore.

This echo-chamber (by which you mean Missouri presumably) is one of the strongholds of conservatism in the US going back decades. If it doesn't represent what grassroots Republicans are thinking, where does?

those "minority dissenters" will draw in the votes, swelling the ranks of districts (and ensuingly, larger bodies) with Republicans who don't care for Trump.

I simply don't see the evidence that anti-Trump Republicans are a significant constituency, though. Republicans in the aggregate have consistently backed Trump for nearly a decade at this point and I see no reason to assume they will suddenly change tack.

You are a damn liar. I said no such thing.

You said that Abbott had a deadline to pass the gerrymander as if that were reason to assume he would fail. Perhaps you didn't specifically claim he would fail, but you were rebutting me when said he would succeed.

[zompist]

You are a damn liar. I said no such thing.

You said that Abbott had a deadline to pass the gerrymander

Yes, because he had a deadline to pass the gerrymander, later this year. This was in response to your claim that he could do it any time.

as if that were reason to assume he would fail.

And this is where you go back to lying. No, you don't know what I was assuming. I stated the truth-- that Abbott had a deadline. I did not say that he would fail.

[keenir]

maybe get your head out of the echo chamber...since the comments you're claiming to hear, are not what any party - MAGA or otherwise - are saying anymore.

This echo-chamber (by which you mean Missouri presumably)

I mean where you live, which you claim is in lockstep with Trump.

is one of the strongholds of conservatism in the US going back decades. If it doesn't represent what grassroots Republicans are thinking, where does?

grassroots =/= yesmen.

those "minority dissenters" will draw in the votes, swelling the ranks of districts (and ensuingly, larger bodies) with Republicans who don't care for Trump.

I simply don't see the evidence

given that we keep showing you evidence that you then claim to never get to see, I don't know if you're lying or just ignoring again.

that anti-Trump Republicans are a significant constituency, though. Republicans in the aggregate have consistently backed Trump for nearly a decade at this point and I see no reason to assume they will suddenly change tack.

given that rank-and-file MAGA and Republicans are opposing Trump and speaking out against him, in Town Halls and elsewhere...they've already changed tack.

You are a damn liar. I said no such thing.

You said that Abbott had a deadline to pass the gerrymander as if that were reason to assume he would fail. Perhaps you didn't specifically claim he would fail, but you were rebutting me when said he would succeed.

I feel like you once heard the phrase "well you're not wrong" and drew entirely the wrong lesson from it.

[malloc]

given that rank-and-file MAGA and Republicans are opposing Trump and speaking out against him, in Town Halls and elsewhere...they've already changed tack.

What percentage, though? You are ignoring the practical reality that supporting Trump is the default and overwhelmingly majority position among Republican voters. We should assume without hesitation that if Republicans retain the House next year, they will continue to support Trump. You can posit all kinds of counterfactual scenarios where Trump manages to alienate his base but you should not confuse those with concrete evidence.