Outlaw83
1yr ago
The people who will stop Chinese hypersonic missiles will be, and I am only slightly being hyperbolic, are trans furry military members in some bunker in Nevada piloting drones or other military gear, not some guy who signed up for reasonable reasons like access to college or career training or the darker reasons.
We already saw this in Ukraine - lots of hype over the true non-woke military, and it's regularly getting shredded by missiles that are largely being guided by a they/them army.
The actual thing that'll probably stop Chinese hypersonic missiles is a combination of they probably don't really exist in the way that anti-woke people hype them up online in the obsessive way they tend too, a corrupt Chinese procurement process that makes the US process look clean and normal, and the fact we've probably got stuff we're working on that we don't have to hype up the way the Chinese do to look strong.
Outlaw83
1yr ago
A few things about this -
1.) As other people have noted, the economy is really good for entry-level work, the type that competes with people who end up signing up for the Army via a recruiter. The reality is, post-World War II, and especially post-Vietnam, the military is a jobs program, both in the form of the disparate congressional districts everything is built and being a fairly decent choice for a young person without many prospects in the many less than favorable part of the US.
2.) I'm old enough to remember when the macho Russian military with their un-woke ways were going to roll over anybody put in front of them, especially the SJW military that'd been feminized, etc., etc., In reality, what happened was those macho Russian soldiers got nailed with missiles by Ukranian's who were given targeting information by some trans furries working at an army base in Nevada.
3.) To follow up on that, one positive of the US military, compared to many militaries around the world, including even some friendly to us, is that isn't not haven of a specific ethnic group, geographic region, or familial background. It's a fairly meritocratic institution that will do what it's told, as long as it doesn't break the Constitution. Want to invade Iraq, and wreck Baghdad? Great. Want to be more friendly to women, LGBT, and other minority soldiers because we need them to fulfill specific roles in a new generation of warfare? Sure. So on and so forth.
It's a fantastic thing the military doesn't have to kneel to a bunch of Southerners upset it's not 1985 (and if I was being less charitable, 1925) anymore, and an army base doesn't look like a John Wayne film anymore. Because it means leadership can be found among the wide swath of America, as opposed to just the parts that certain demographics approve of.
4.) Even though I disagree, I have some sympathy for normal people who lost their jobs because of COVID. When it comes to the military, sorry, Charlie. You signed away that whole freedom thing. If they can send you to die in the middle of Ukraine possibly, they can make you get the jab.
5.) I'm perfectly happy to let the Right give away the military, along with football, and a ton of other things bit of the reactionary online right (including folks like Blake Masters) have soured on in the past few years.
6.) Finally, we're still the world's hyperpower, no matter what people upset with some social policy may claim online. If you look into any actual wargames we've lost, you quickly find we put so many limits on our own equipment, just to make things interesting. Yes, random think tankers, Congressman, and such, all whom either work closely with military contractors or whom have jobs in their district, will talk about China as some massive threat militarily, along with ideologues who dislike current American society.
The reality is, the way war is going for the US military, and I actually make the distinction here, is we actually need more people who are open and OK with lots of different types of people, as long as they can "shoot straight," to use a quote from Barry Goldwater, as opposed to a bunch of people with nostalgic ideas about the past of the military. I'm sure there were military families who talked about not sending the next generation, whenever things became a little more open.
But, hey like I said, if the Right also wants to totally hand the military over to us, we'll take it.
Outlaw83
9mo ago
If it was truly a bipartisan feeling, then election denying GOP Secretary of State candidates would've done a lot better in 2022.
"Elections are crap" may be a feeling that people get if they talk about long lines and so on, but no, the feeling one party is stealing elections is only among a group of one party, seen by their nominees and so on. Yes, I know, there's one weird poll showing some large amount of Democrat's think the Russians did shady stuff. Yet, there were no candidates in 2018, 2020, or 2022 that ran in any major way that Trump was not the legitimate elected President, by the current rules.
Outlaw83
11mo ago
I mean, the actual reality here is it turns out, women are actually much better at the type of schooling initially dominated by boy's for decades - aka, sit at a desk and listen to a teacher for hours upon hours, which even with whatever changes to pedagogy there have been, still seems to be the prominent way education is done, except maybe now there's a few more computer screens.
It's interesting how there wasn't there criticism of this type of schooling when men were 70% of college students - no, the boys were just told to sit down and listen instead of being given excuses by conservatives.
Outlaw83
9mo ago
I know this is a typical argument from dissident righties that world is a failing state and everything is collapsing, but conservatively, the world is a better place for approximately 70% of the world's population. Even using a purely American perspective, the median American city is still wealthier and for instance, has less crime than broad swathes of the 70's and 80's. Yes, if you truly think the fact there are more non-white people and that non-straight people of all sorts are open about it is truly a disastrous thing, OK, but this happened to Gerald Ford in '76.
Outlaw83
10mo ago
Putting aside the weird "save the white and Asian race from dominance by the scary blacks and browns" at the end, I think here's the issue why the people in this thread aren't getting it.
There's the population of women.
There's the population of women that are OK w/ the pain of childbirth (or maybe they're lucky it's less painful for them) and the worries, because they enjoy being a mother that much more, and so on.
Then there's the population of women that thinks the pain is too much, doesn't want children, whatever.
It used to be the latter population was basically forced to be mothers, because that was their only option in society, outside of spinsterhood. Now, they don't, or maybe instead of having five by 27, they have one at 37.
Nobody among the latter group is saying the former group should stop having children. They just don't want to be forced (or "forced") to have more children by the state or society. Group B always existed in one form or another - they just never had a voice before, and if you're used to a society where all women either legitimately or have to act like they want to be mothers, it can sound fake or like some plot or whatever.
Outlaw83
1yr ago
So, despite what the other people are saying, I think what upsets the sort of anti-anti-Trump person that talks about 2012 the most isn't the just-so story about Romney being this honorable man the evil Democrat's attacks, that were so wrong and beyond the pale.
It's that 2012 was the first time the Democratic Party realized they had a national majority and acted that way in a national campaign. The reality is for the previous 30+ years, from Carter on, the Democrat's basically agreed with the Republican prescription of things, they just wanted a slightly kinder way of doing it - yes, crime is out of control. Yes, welfare is bad. Yes, government is too big, but the GOP are run by crazies who won't cut the right things. That was basically the Dukakis/Bill Clinton/Al Gore/even John Kerry argument.
Obama shifted that, but 2008 wasn't much of a nasty election because McCain liked Obama and vice versa, and people realized the GOP were doomed. But, in 2012, the Democrat's did thing they hadn't did in deciades - talked about how maybe, very rich people weren't perfect ideals of greatness who deserved all the credit for everything.
It helped that Mitt Romney said he liked to fire people, had shut down companies to get rich, and attacked half the population as well, basically 'deplorables' (unlike Hillary, who only attacked half of the Trump voters, so about 25%). People also forget in the post-2012 election, he basically blamed his loss on people (specifically minorities) wanting free stuff before he calmed down.
Now, I know the pushback will be "well, liberals love him now," and as the resident left-wing partisan Democrat, we don't love Mitt Romney, we just accept a right-wing neoliberal is better than a wannabee fascist, and Romney's one of the last Republican's who have actual ideas. Plus, 2012 Republican Nominee Mitt Romney wasn't really what Mitt Romney wanted to be, and he'd admit that to you today. He just couldn't run and win a primary as either 2006 MA Governor Mitt or current day pro-BLM pro-child tax credit anti-insurrection Mitt. I still don't think he's a good guy, I think his wealth should be taxed, and in a perfect world, his many, many children would not get much inheritance from him.
As for the rest, the petty BS people get hung up on happens in every Presidential election - Carter almost lost because he was slightly honest in a Playboy interview, the supposed liberal NYT turned Gore into some serial liar, and peopel already went over the Swift Boating of Kerry.
I also don't regret stopping him from massively cutting people's taxes, passing right-wing social policy, and so on. Be better than the petty wannabe fascist doesn't make you good. Respecting the will of the people isn't a high bar to clear, so I don't need to give him cookies.
But yes, to a certain brand of conservative who was used to the Democrat's being the Washington Generals, where they got most of their policies passed even when the Democrat's won, 2012 was the first time in their political memory the Democrat's actually punched back, and they've never forgiven Obama for doing so, which is why they'll talk themselves into supporting Trump, again.
Outlaw83
1yr ago
Plenty of tree branches in the South, and there weren't that many rich planters. Hand the planters land over to white and black farmers, and there we go.
Outlaw83
9mo ago
Why wasn't the 2022 Wisconsin Senate race rigged? Why weren't more House races in close districts rigged when the GOP only won by 4 seats? Hell, why didn't they rig the 2018 Florida Governor race? It's weird how we're only successful at rigging some of the time, when in other countries, with actual governments that rig elections (that many of the people who are very worried about rigging in American elections prefer to the American govenrment) are always successful.
Outlaw83
1yr ago
Every single "Ripped from the Headlines" Law & Order story in many cases is more salacious than the actual case is almost 100% of the time. Because even 'ripped from the headlines' stories are sometimes not tight stories for a 43-minute show on network TV.
The only reason you're seemingly upset about this portrayal, which from your description, is no less over the top than other 'ripped from the headlines' story I remember from when I watched the show, as opposed to the other portrayals of criminals, is you don't think Daniel Perry is a criminal and is instead, a hero. Welcome to being for criminal justice reform then, I guess.
Also, the actual reason Law & Order moved from more realistic crime stories in it's first couple of seasons to basically ripped from the headlines and rich people doing terrible stuff wasn't wokeness - it's that the over the top stuff got more viewers.
Outlaw83
2yr ago
Yup, there's always these polls that show "x of professors used to be Republicans in y year, but now..." when I can guarantee you that most professors who were still registered as Republican in say, 1980, hadn't voted for a Republican since maybe, Nixon, the first time, and were only registered Republican's because of weird ethnic coalitional politics where they grew up, or being in one of the weird places where the GOP were the more left-leaning party (like say, the South, and that's even kind of questionable).
Put it this way, the amount of Reagan-voting professors in 1980 is probably similar to the amount of Trump-voting professors in 2022.
Also, as noted, there are a lot of moderate professors who'd vote for a center-right European party that was liberal socially, but I suppose most of the people upset about woke professors wouldn't be too happy about that either.
Finally, the culture war, as far as "cancel culture" or "trans issues" go are low salience issues, even for GOP voters, as seen in midterm exist polls. In reality, it's the bugaboo of general right-wing social reactionaries, and centrists stuck in D+50 urban areas. Yes, if you're a standard-issue centrist Dem who works at a college or in media, you're probably annoyed by what the woke kids want to do. But, be like Matt Yglesias or Jonathan Chait, and complain enough online about them that they get annoyed by you, while also writing a lot about how Ron DeSantis voted a lot to cut Social Security & Medicare, and that Republican's still want to ban abortion, as opposed to spending all your time on the woke thing of the moment.
Even CRT/school closures as an issue, is kind of sketchy - people point to 2021 and Virginia, but if you really look into things, voting patterns show the standard drop in voting for everybody as is standard for off-year VA Governor elections, except for 70+ voters, which tells me the CRT thing was a bugaboo to older conservative voters, and that's about it. Even DeSantis and his massive win, is more accurately connected to general shifts in Florida's population (big increase in Venezuelan refugees + more older conservatives from midwes states moving in + COVID "refugees) + DeSantis doing non-conservative things (like using ARP money to raise teacher salaries + broadly supported environmental protections + not f'ng up post-hurricane) + as a bonus, the anti-woke stuff + a massive drop in turnout among Democratic voters. I forget the exact numbers, but only 80% of Democrat's turned out in 2022 compared to 2018, while 107% of Republican's did, and that's not all changes in voting registration.
Now, personally, as a leftie, I'm actually kind of OK w/ Florida becoming a Republican vote sink. Yes, all right-leaning people, upset about your woke swing state, move to Tampa. Upset Michigan has a Democratic trifecta, hit the road to West Palm Beach. Pennsylvania not banning abortion got you down? Panama Beach is looking lovely.
Outlaw83
8mo ago
Speaking as a left-leaning social democrat who dislikes all the Republican judges for obvious reaosns, Gorsuch is the only one who actually seemingly has an identifiable philosophy ala Scalia (except actually better) that I can at least respect, even though I think it's personally terrible. Maybe Thomas did 20 years ago, but he's fallen into a FOX News brained duo alongside Alito for basically the entirety of the Trump era.
Outlaw83
9mo ago
As a partisan Democrat, if we can rig things so easily, I've always wondered why we didn't say, rig things in the very close Wisconsin Senate race in 2022 if we obviously rigged it for Biden in 2020 or why didn't we keep rigging things for Gillum and Nelson. Or did the rigging only start after 2016? Because if so, even then, it might've been smart to rig a few more Senate races so we likely weren't going to lose the Senate even if Kamala wins.
Outlaw83
9mo ago
I mean, I guarantee there were parts of the country that accelerated a similar rate, when you account for a much bigger immigration wave nationally.
But putting that aside, once you're in the United States, you're allowed to live where you can get housing. That's it. The community doesn't get a veto.
Outlaw83
9mo ago
Except some currently high skill American residents are the descendants of low skill immigrants and refugees. If you actually want long-term dynamism and growth, you actually have to roll the dice on people without the right papers and hope for the best. Worked pretty well the first 250 years or so.
Outlaw83
9mo ago
I mean, one should be able to look at the crime rate of Springfield, Ohio over the next few years and see if things shift that much. Of course, history shows that at least w/ the first generation of immigrants, crime is likely to go down.
Outlaw83
11mo ago
As I've said before, the problem is the core of the anti-immigration people aren't willing to give up some of their other right-wing policy goals.
Meloni in Italy seems to be doing fine, if not doing as much as perhaps she promised (like all politicians), but there's no deep state plot to remove her or whatever people claim about anti-immigration politicians, because she's pro-NATO and acts like a normal politician within the Overton Window of Italian politics.
But also, there was a super anti-immigration party on the ballot for the UK. Eighty six percent of the population chose somebody else. That 14% doesn't get veto power via rioting, and that's why you see strong support among the populace for harsh measures for the rioters.
Outlaw83
11mo ago
I mean, this is a general problem for the current GOP, which is different from the past.
As a dirty left-winger, I opposed the Bush GOP with all my heart, but I understood they were trying to win majority support. They failed in 2000, but even putting aside everything post-9/11, they governed in a way to try to get a majority in 2004 - Medicare Part D, No Child Left Behind, etc. along with social conservative stuff I didn't like, but was at least far more popular at the time.
Which, they were then rewarded with the last electoral Presidential majority a Republican candidate has received in 2004, that then they decided to blow-up by trying to privatize Social Security.
Now, the GOP seems not interested in actually winning over a majority of voters. The view seems to be, run a straight flush, win with 47.3% of the vote, then act like you won a 35-state mandate in your actions afterward, then be shocked you become unpopular 19 seconds into office.
Ironically, that's why beyond pure partisanship, it would've been nice if what looked like was possible in 2004 - Kerry winning w/ a popular vote loss - would've happened, because then there might've been a bi-partisan movement to trash the Electoral College, and I'm not saying that as somebody who believes the GOP would be unable to create a platform and argument to win a national popular vote.
Outlaw83
2yr ago
I mean, I highly doubt Marco Rubio would've tried to pay off porn stars, talk the governor of Georgia into finding some votes, or instigating an insurrection after he narrowly lost Arizona in 2020.
Outlaw83
2yr ago
It's not so much the media doesn't care about white victims - it's that the African-American community is organized in such a way that if somebody gets shot by the police, somebody in that family knows a pastor or a community organizer who knows another pastor or a local politician who knows somebody reasonably famous or a prominent journalist to get it out there.
Meanwhile, probably half of the white victims' own family will back the cops over the victim.
Outlaw83
10mo ago
The true problem for 'it's inherent for women to want to have babies' arguments isn't PMC girlbosses in suburban Virginia or whatever people may think are destroying society. It's that even in places like Iran or Saudi Arabia, where women continue to be very socially conservative in a variety of other ways - marrying early, openly religious, and so on, are also happily controlling their own reproduction instead of just jumping into babies as quickly as possible.
Outlaw83
2yr ago
If it's true the Grossberg lawsuit is the reason for Tucker's firing - (there's also a LA Times story that Rupert thought Tucker's 1/6 coverage might get them in trouble), it proves that the Right needs to learn that yes, you can probably make "cancellable" statements about minorities in a college-educated conservative-leaning workplace, because any minorities who work in such a place aren't going to be upset about it or they'll just agree.
OTOH, making jokes about which female Governor candidate you'd rather have sex with is likely to upset even otherwise quite conservative women at that said workplace, because even in a right-wing space to the right of much of the nation, the median conservative woman is still going to be upset about openly sexual comments like that. 1960's/1970's feminism - aka, I can have my own job, financial independence, not getting fired for getting pregnant, and freedom from open sexism in the workplace is basically believed by 90% of women in the US.
The Right needs to learn this, or they'll keep ending up in the same place.
Outlaw83
2yr ago
Perhaps I've missed them, but I've never seen anyone here propose any laws that take away women's rights to choose their sexual partners.
Not this week, but a couple of weeks back there was plenty of talk of explicitly limiting women's access to higher education, etc. along with banning birth control, etc. Now, no, this isn't explicitly taking away women's right to do so, but come on.
Outlaw83
8mo ago
Yes, among actual voters, sure.
But, Republican's voted against various pro-birth control bills on both the state and local level.
Then, you've got members of The Heritage Foundation, who wrote Project 2025 talking about returning consequentiality to sex - https://x.com/Heritage/status/1662534135762624520
Project 2025 also says the morning after bill is an abortion bill and the coverage of it should be eliminated and there's also been talk about the Comstock Act.
So, there's some talk downthread about Springfield, Ohio, Haitian immigrants and such. Putting aside I guarantee in the late 19th century there was in fact plenty of examples of massive population changes, even in more rural parts of the country. Ironically, many of the same people who put forth those population changes are now the ones scared of immigration, so in 50 years, as is American tradition, these Haitian immigrants will be saying we shouldn't be letting in the Bangladeshi's or whomever.
But, the interesting thing is the questions about "why" anybody puts up with them and well, at least according to local business owners, because they're more likely to show up to do the job and not fail a drug test than the righteous pure American's currently living there.
https://youtube.com/watch?si=nke3DETnGvcaAHE4&v=FA80DOcJnu8&feature=youtu.be - Youtube video
https://x.com/otis_reid/status/1833578554778374462 - Quote from the factory owner.
Of course, 2016 J.D. Vance would probably agree with this factory owner about the get up 'n' go of this socioeconomic group of people instead of defending them from economic competition from supposedly mentally deficient Haitians.
Now, to quote a lot of Twitter, it is true the Haitians are ruining that community's traditions, by actually getting to work and not showing up high.
More options
Context Copy link