This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
That’s essentially what happened this election, things got bad enough economically that the choice became easier.
Then explain why Biden didn’t suffer much worse in 2022? The economy was worse then compared to now (was literally a recession — the only reason NBER didn’t call it a recession was due to employment numbers that later proceed to be massively overstated).
Things got bad enough economically because of the president's choices. Gas prices did peak June 2022 but the average voter I'm sure is able to differentiate when it's Russia starting a war then vs America starting a war now.
Gas prices didn’t get to where they were primarily because of Russia in 2022.
Notably, diesel got to where it was largely due to Ukraine’s efforts which seem targeted to get Dems elected. I hope Trump turns off all help to Ukraine and Ukraine gets overrun.
What factors about gas prices that the average voter would have linked to Biden and therefore punished him in the 2022 midterms for?
Ukraine is fighting an existential war with a nuclear power, if I was in charge of Ukraine I would do the same. Maybe if Trump was a better diplomat or his administration has better expertise in a strategic sense, they could have maintained relationships with Ukraine, be in the know, and asked/negotiated so that Russian refineries be hit after the midterms. Ukraine isn't in the game to help Trump, Ukraine is in the game to help itself. If Trump turns off all help and let Ukraine gets overrun, he will go down as the US president that let the re-emergence of Russia. Add in the unfolding blunder with Iran and what is there except to laugh.
General inflation from unnecessary stimulus and general anti O&G policies
I can understand why Ukraine would make the choice they made. But the point is that Ukraine actively fought their war in a way to influence the American election (ie election interference). Maybe we ought to punish them for that?
I definitely don't discount the inflationary policies of the Biden administration. But you have to at least agree with me that starting a war is a very simple easy to understand cause that everyone can attribute directly to the rise in gas prices comparatively.
Uhhhh, let the nation who does not interfere in others elections cast the first stone. There's no right or wrong here, there is just national interest. It's true that maybe Trump should and can punish Ukraine out of retaliation, but that's not really accomplishing anything strategic and would be a long term investment for the country. I am of the interest that US power is strong and multiplied through our alliances (unless the US have the national will to expand the country once more). A move to hurt Ukraine is just hurting oneself here in my opinion.
I think there was an easy argument that Biden spent too much! If you are arguing over whether Iran was more a direct cause, then yes. At the same time, gas prices even in nominal terms are significantly lower compared to Biden’s gas problem.
Re Ukraine, we spent ten years freaking out about “election interference.” What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. Also, I’d rather not have Europe as allies if it rid us of Democrats.
I agree generally. I probably come in to any discussion about government spending with a baseline of thinking that the government spent too much.
And so disagree with the voters or not, that's what they would have thought of as the reason why their prices are so high or that their lives are so hard. I also forgot to mention tariffs earlier so I'm throwing it in as well. Look, if Iran is worth it, and I am very open to this argument because I have no fondness of that regime, then the Trump administration has just not convinced people of that. If it wasn't all because of Iran (and tariffs), then the Trump administration and Republicans in general have not convinced people that the case. The simple argument is just common sense to people and they voted accordingly.
In this site, looking at the "Adjusted for Inflation (CPI)" chart, I see that Nov 2022 gas price was $4.10 and Nov 2026 gas price is $4.00. In nominal terms, it was $3.61 in Nov 2022 and $4.00 in Nov 2026. Even if I disregard that nominal terms show something different, but if we look at the trend, in 2022, people can see/feel that prices were super duper high but it was dropping over time. They probably begrudge why things aren't getting better faster but they probably had a feel that the economics is at least not chaotic and not unpredictable and not getting worse. 2026 prices though has stayed in high prices for a while and it doesn't look like it's dropping and there is no clear plan of how Trump and the Republicans will help them after the midterms.
I disagree that Trump's interests align with mine so I don't really agree with this take, assuming what you mean is that Trump retaliation is good for Trump and Trump is the goose to my interest's gander.
I disagree with this goal. I think having allies and friends are good for the US, even if it means the job is complex and hard to navigate. I also disagree that Republicans/right-leans should make it a goal to get rid of Democrats/left-leans, and vice versa. Having such diverse and "energetic" opposition to each other, while still able to maintain peaceful and prosperous society, is exactly why America continues to be the most powerful country in the world. History is littered with leaders and movements and countries that weren't able to adapt and change because they've already wiped out all opposition and got stuck in their ways. Short term success sure through sheer brute force, sure, but nothing long lasting.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Things are not 'bad enough economically'. There are legitimate complaints about the economy, yes, but this isn't even 2008. We saw a gigantic blue wave for other reasons- voters rated 'corruption' as the only issue that was more important to them than 'affordability', and in practice that's probably mostly Epstein and other low-IQ conspiracy theories. I think ICE and the GOP being way-too-online also backfired electorally.
Remember, in '08 the economy was way worse but republicans didn't lose nearly as hard.
From what I understand, the Dems already won a bunch in 2006, that's why the Republicans didn't lose as hard, 2008 was just the Dems running up the score after the blowout already happened. "Corruption" became the top rated issue, higher than grocery and gas prices, following a monthslong messaging effort by Democrats to link widespread economic dissatisfaction with what they allege is rampant corruption by President Donald Trump and his Republican allies.. It was about, for a voter, going from, "my life is hard because everything is so expensive" to "my life is hard because all this corruption and billionaires is making my life expensive" or "my life is hard because Trump cares more about his own personal benefit than making my life easier".
There is this idiom in China: "Water that is too clear has few fish, and one who is too critical has few friends". I really don't think people cares about Trump's corruption if prices are low and they can still "seem" to improve their life reasonably. But now that their life gotten so hard and so bad quickly enough, and with a clear decision made by the one in charge (Iran war), voters become instantly persuaded. Republicans may not vote for the other guy, but why would they show up for their team when they feel like they're being treated as chumps.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link