site banner
Goodguy  1d ago (text post)   Edited 21hr ago   6851 thread views

Midterms Megathread

Cause otherwise midterms discussion will be scattered around a bunch of separate Culture War thread posts. And it's nice to have more off-the-cuff rapid reactions in a dedicated megathread.

The first thing I've noticed so far: if the exit polls are correct, Americans are very pessimistic about AI.

12
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Doing the ultimate cut-your-nose-off to spite your face is unintelligent and should not be allowed.

You appear to believe that outcomes you don't agree with should be against the rules. It is hard to imagine a less productive concept of politics, particularly where you have no rule-making or -enforcing power.

Trump ran on no foreign wars, and then started a stupid, destructive foreign war. Republicans prominently mocked the idea of using government power to help the objectively most disadvantaged and most loyal constituency they had. You think they should be rewarded for these actions?

These “wars” end up in America whether you like it or not. Iran I guess you can say wouldn’t. Venezuela we already had millions getting US benefits here on asylum. While they also destabilized other neighbors.

They really don't if you don't let them look at Syria. Also Trump nabbed Maduro it's not like that got rid of the Venezuela asylum seekers. Iran was at peace before there wasn't a war to end up in the US if Trump didn't start one.

I think Trump has removed a lot of Venezuelans status. If you want less risks of immigration from Americas where they can just walk here then America needs to be doing war on this side of the globe when there are bad governments.

So I think war in Americas is completely different than Middle East Wars.

Republicans prominently mocked the idea of using government power to help the objectively most disadvantaged and most loyal constituency they had.

What is this referring to?

Young white men, the $20 burrito affordability question, prominent Republicans pretending that they're going to balance the budget and that's why intervention in the economy just can't be done.

Can you tell me what policy could have helped the white men? Removing labor market competition they tried to do and was partially successful at. They did a solid job at hitting DEI which removed some roadblocks to jobs. Cutting food stamps and other UBIs in the economy would help with inflation and they should ramp that up.

But for 2 years in power they an ok jump at the “help the white man” levers.

Looting the treasury to give them money directly would have been a pretty good option. Serious retaliation toward the institutions that had been targeting them wouldn't have been bad. But actively mocking them and their concerns was a very bad idea, and a lot of Republicans chose to do that.

Which is why young white men refused to fight in the civil war-by-proxy.

There’s plenty of room for other nations to pick up the 100 dollars on the ground, at least. Ironically, a successful reform party seeking that demographic should probably be female; at least that way you’d have a leader that is at least attracted to the idea they exist.

(Glances at Alberta.)

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats