Soviet-Empire.com U.S.S.R. and communism historical discussion.
[ Active ]
[ Login ]
Log-in to remove these advertisements.

2016 US Election

POST REPLY

Who would you vote for in the US presidential election?

Hillary Clinton (Democratic)
4
25%
Donald Trump (Republican)
2
13%
Gary Johnson (Libertarian)
1
6%
Jill Stein (Green)
2
13%
Gloria La Riva (Party for Socialism and Liberation)
5
31%
Alyson Kennedy (Socialist Workers Party)
0
No votes
Monica Moorehead (Workers World Party)
0
No votes
Mimi Soltysik (Socialist Party USA)
0
No votes
Refuse to vote
2
13%
Other
0
No votes
 
Total votes : 16
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 1078
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 21 Sep 2013, 03:08
Ideology: Trotskyism
Party Member
Post 18 Nov 2016, 06:55
Comrade Gulper wrote:
The goal of every W-grade hawkish Republican is to mop the floor with The Bad Guys, regardless of what configuration they take or what label we give them.

Basically. The centerpiece of neoconservative ideology is "let's take on Iran/ISIS/Syria/China/Russia/North Korea/Cuba/Venezuela. All of them. Literally all of them."

Quote:
I was speaking largely of Trump's public rhetoric, which is bound to take on an increasingly harsh and hawkish tone, especially as the snubs, guffaws, and outright insults (across the board from Merkel to Kim Jong Un) begin to come to his attention. Having advisers like Bolton, Flynn, or Bannon at his side won't help matters.

Agreed. His transition team is a chaotic wreck as-is, they're basically having to purge anyone who was ever associated with Chris Christie and they keep confusedly adding and dropping names from the department lists in a way that's completely unprecedented. He's vastly in over his head. And that's before he starts getting people baiting him and puncturing holes in his ego.

Quote:
Romney would at least be a potentially calming influence as far as foreign affairs are concerned, although this same individual would be horrendous for domestic policy.

Potentially. He does have a calm and sober temperament which is what I'd look for in a diplomat, and I think he'd do less damage at State than Treasury, but I think his disinterest in foreign policy is a huge red flag as SecState. It means he can be easily led into less than helpful stances by less than helpful Undersecretaries surrounding him, like in his 2012 campaign for President. I'm reluctantly pulling for that smug asshole from Chattanooga to get the job, and even he's a terrible idea.

EDIT: He's made his first official, set in stone cabinet picks. Sessions has been given Attorney General rather than Defense; in either case, this is a man whose entire career has been built on racist blathering. Flynn has, as widely predicted, been given National Security Advisor. The CIA Director is a hardline Iran hawk and NSA defender from Wichita, Congressman Mike Pompeo. Tom Cotton from Arkansas, the Senate's chief opponent of the Iran deal, is the leading contender for Defense now.
Soviet cogitations: 12389
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 18 Apr 2010, 04:44
Ideology: None
Philosophized
Post 18 Nov 2016, 21:34
Looks like Bannon has been judged too hot to handle. On the other hand, Sessions was once booted from a Federal judgeship...by his own party...for making wide use of "racially insensitive" language. Small wonder David Duke loves this new regime so much.

I wonder what the fallout will be from Giuliani not picking up a major cabinet post? They'll have to give him something to keep his ego fed, or else find a way to silence him.

Still no word on the ultimate fate of Chris Christie. All indications point to a jail cell, possibly the deluxe Club Fed resort package that many people assumed was earmarked for Hillary.
Miss Strangelove: "You feed giants laxatives so goblins can mine their poop before the gnomes get to it."
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 1078
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 21 Sep 2013, 03:08
Ideology: Trotskyism
Party Member
Post 18 Nov 2016, 21:58
Comrade Gulper wrote:
Looks like Bannon has been judged too hot to handle.

Where are you seeing that? I haven't seen anything about him being booted yet. He's still Chief Strategist as far as I can see, which would make him the Trump administration's Karl Rove.

Quote:
On the other hand, Sessions was once booted from a Federal judgeship...by his own party...for making wide use of "racially insensitive" language. Small wonder David Duke loves this new regime so much.

He's Alabama's senior Senator and has built his career on advocating for booting out them thur Mehicans. Racist dog-whistles come with the territory. Between this, Bannon, and the rhetoric from Trump's own campaign announcement speech, David Duke is starting to lurch into the bounds of normalcy.

Quote:
I wonder what the fallout will be from Giuliani not picking up a major cabinet post? They'll have to give him something to keep his ego fed, or else find a way to silence him.

He still could get Homeland Security, conceivably. He's essentially terrifying as either AG or at DHS. I'd probably guess he's the top choice for Homeland Security at this point, actually, because Trump doesn't usually jettison loyal surrogates. Compulsive ass-kissers have been rewarded with cushy jobs at his business and in his campaign, I see no evidence that this won't hold for the presidency as well. If he's given the axe, it'll be because like in his 2008 presidential campaign, he has too extensive a track record of corruption for the Republicans' congressional leaders to accept him as representing their brand.

Quote:
Still no word on the ultimate fate of Chris Christie. All indications point to a jail cell, possibly the deluxe Club Fed resort package that many people assumed was earmarked for Hillary.

I'm not 100% sure the prosecution against Clinton won't go through. It was a clear-cut campaign promise he made in two successive debates. It not happening will disappoint his base as much as the Wall not happening, and it's much easier to prosecute a political opponent than it is to build a colossal boondoggle that'll cost billions.

But yeah, Christie is going to jail in a few months. He has no allies anymore, his top aides were indicted a few days ago.

We've also entered into an Idiocracy age of celebrity politics. Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson has announced he might challenge Trump in the 2020 Republican primary. Chris Rock, Kanye West, and Ron Perlman have announced they might run for President on the Democratic side. There's speculation Lady Gaga might run for Governor of New York or Senator in 2018. I think we'll get it out of our system once the novelty of "I just elected someone who has no experience" wears off, but until then, I do not like this trend. I say this as someone who probably would support Germanotta for Governor/Senate, she's a smart woman. And who would love to see Chris Rock in the 2020 Democratic debates, I think he's hilarious, though if he were actually nominated they'd signify that they're as stupid on average as the Republicans. West is as narcissistic and unstable as Trump himself, he can frag off.
Last edited by MissStrangelove on 18 Nov 2016, 22:59, edited 3 times in total.
Soviet cogitations: 12389
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 18 Apr 2010, 04:44
Ideology: None
Philosophized
Post 18 Nov 2016, 22:05
I've seen multiple sources that basically reiterate that Bannon is out as Chief of Staff, in favor of Reince Priebus. Bannon could still score some other position, but not the huge prize he was looking for. Of course, things could change.

It looks like this may have had something to do with it.

The sooner we stop electing reality show hosts and contestants as government officials, the better. Of course, we'll first need to be burned five or six times before the lesson is absorbed.
Miss Strangelove: "You feed giants laxatives so goblins can mine their poop before the gnomes get to it."
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 1078
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 21 Sep 2013, 03:08
Ideology: Trotskyism
Party Member
Post 18 Nov 2016, 22:07
Comrade Gulper wrote:
I've seen multiple sources that basically reiterate that Bannon is out as Chief of Staff, in favor of Reince Priebus.

Erm, Bannon was never the pick for Chief of Staff. That's been Priebus for days now. Bannon was given the currently made-up role of "Chief Strategist," in a move akin to Bush formalizing the "Senior Advisor" role so he could give Karl Rove an appointed job. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/15/us/po ... dency.html
Soviet cogitations: 12389
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 18 Apr 2010, 04:44
Ideology: None
Philosophized
Post 18 Nov 2016, 22:16
Well, if we're reduced to talking about completely made up positions, it'll be harder than ever to keep track of these goons.

This will be probably be the most "innovative" cabinet in history.
Miss Strangelove: "You feed giants laxatives so goblins can mine their poop before the gnomes get to it."
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 1078
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 21 Sep 2013, 03:08
Ideology: Trotskyism
Party Member
Post 18 Nov 2016, 22:27
Comrade Gulper wrote:
This will be probably be the most "innovative" cabinet in history.

At least since the end of the spoils system, when it was standard practice to stack the federal bureaucracy with as many partisan appointees as you could. Fortunately, that's now illegal for all but senior posts and we now have a career civil service. But I'm sure the top-ranking ghouls who couldn't get past Congress like Bannon, Gingrich, possibly Giuliani will all get some cushy made-up title somewhere in the West Wing.
Soviet cogitations: 12389
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 18 Apr 2010, 04:44
Ideology: None
Philosophized
Post 19 Nov 2016, 06:01
What depresses me the most is the 4 Supreme Court Justices Trump will have a crack at promoting to the bench. "Scalia's Revenge" has all the makings of a truly epic saga of the Transylvanian variety.

Public outcry (from the half of the public that didn't vote for him) may put the gag on some of his more outrageous appointments. Bannon the many-times-documented racist may not scan. But I tend to think that such protests will merely have the Darwinian effect of weeding out the small time thugs so that the truly hideous survivors can slither their way to the big prize.
Miss Strangelove: "You feed giants laxatives so goblins can mine their poop before the gnomes get to it."
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 758
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 28 Jan 2008, 19:10
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Komsomol
Post 19 Nov 2016, 06:44
Its almost to the point of parody how out of touch some of the Putinist ideologues are with the US political reality.

This is almost comedic how Dugin says that from now on Americans are only going to get their news from Infowars and the LA Times.

https://4threvolutionarywar.wordpress.c ... der-dugin/

Quote:
This means more than just complete default for almost all major networks and large information corporations, besides The Los Angeles Times which, against all the rest, confidently predicted Trump’s victory. This means the emergence of a new information sphere, a symbol of which is Alex Jones’ Infowars, which has turned into the most powerful resource of true information in the US and whose audience has rapidly grown to 20,000,000 in a matter of days and bypassed the big-budget channels. This is not only the power of belief, this is the power of truth. In insisting that the truth does matter, Alex Jones expresses the position of real America, that America which saw its full representative in Trump. More than half of the US population believes only in itself, not the lying liberal globalist propaganda of the transnational elites. This is brilliant news. Dialogue can be held with this kind of America. Out of the shadows has emerged a second America whose symbolic information resources are now The Los Angeles Times and Alex Jones’ internet television.


Why did he single out the LA Times as a source of alternative media? Because they had an outlier poll that showed Trump winning. (Which was actually wrong because it had him winning the popular vote by 3 points). But they are actually extremely mainstream "establishment". So its hilarious that he thinks they and Alex Jones are going to be the new Pravda of the Real America.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/

https://youtu.be/uEQlNJdR8jo?t=221

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/endorsem ... story.html

Putin Save us Los Angeles Times!

He even has lines about how out of the shadows a second America has emerged with their information symbols being Alex Jones and the LA Times. For anyone who knows the slightest bit about the LA Times or even just looks at their current editorial page, this is quite hilarious.

And on the political score, it actually ends up proving the opposite of his point about "Lamestream Media" hegemony, in that a paper that endorsed Clinton can also publish polls predicting a Trump win. It negates his conspiracy theory of deliberate cover up.

Can't believe this guy was a co-founder of the KPRF.
Kamran Heiss
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 1078
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 21 Sep 2013, 03:08
Ideology: Trotskyism
Party Member
Post 19 Nov 2016, 07:17
Comrade Gulper wrote:
Public outcry (from the half of the public that didn't vote for him) may put the gag on some of his more outrageous appointments. Bannon the many-times-documented racist may not scan.

Bannon is a White House staff appointment, Chief Strategist sits beside the President rather than personally managing something larger than a group of staffers. Like Priebus or the possible "Ivanka as Senior Advisor," he doesn't have to go through congressional approval. Department heads do.

So, the only way Bannon wouldn't be appointed is if Trump felt his appointment would hurt his reelection chances. Since Bannon's status as Trump's main advisor obviously didn't prevent Trump from winning the presidency, I think he's unlikely to make that calculation.

Quote:
But I tend to think that such protests will merely have the Darwinian effect of weeding out the small time thugs so that the truly hideous survivors can slither their way to the big prize.

Bannon seems more like the latter, unfortunately. He's a very successful person, and consistently. Christie is a perfect example of "small time thug," and it's clear he won't be offered anything.

heiss93 wrote:
This is almost comedic how Dugin says that from now on Americans are only going to get their news from Infowars and the LA Times.

That's totally out of touch, yeah. Mr. "THEY'RE TURNING THE FRICKIN' FROGS GAY!"/"NERDS ARE THE BIGGEST THREAT TO AMERICA!"/"DMT DEMON ELVES!" is not going to get significantly more viewers now than he had before the election. He's still a joke outside of the Paulbot crowd and rural millenialist gun nuts.

The LA Times has earned slightly more respect among major American papers, but its numbers were always reported in a list of figures because they're already a well-respected establishment paper along the lines of Washington Post. It should also be noted that they considerably overshot and as you mentioned predicted a Trump win in the popular vote (didn't happen), plus a victory in Michigan and Pennsylvania by like 6% (didn't happen). It was actually more like 1% in those states, which was within the 3% margin of error the polling average gave since Clinton polled as 2% ahead. It was about 3% in Wisconsin, which has harsh voter ID laws that strongly depress poor/black turnout.

Quote:
But they are actually extremely mainstream "establishment". So its hilarious that he thinks they and Alex Jones are going to be the new Pravda of the Real America.

Absolutely, linking those two is really strange. LA Times bears more similarity to the Washington Post, New York Times, or San Francisco Chronicle, old legacy mildly-left-of-center establishment papers, than it does Infowars. Infowars is like a more deranged version of the Breitbart-Drudge right-wing tabloid combine, and that's with their conscious effort to "mainstream" and court Roger Stone/hop on the alt-right bandwagon in the last two years. They jettisoned the UFO-nut-style "DMT elves" talk, though they returned to form in the last days of the election with the "Clinton and Podesta have satanic sex rituals and are possessed by demons as proven by flies landing on them" stuff.

Quote:
Can't believe this guy was a co-founder of the KPRF.

Dugin is essentially a fascist in red garb. Nothing more, nothing less. His worldview differs little from that of Adolf Hitler, just adapted for the circumstances of Russia rather than Germany.
Last edited by MissStrangelove on 19 Nov 2016, 08:41, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 758
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 28 Jan 2008, 19:10
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Komsomol
Post 19 Nov 2016, 07:20
Dugin would be more like the weirdo Thule society occultists Hitler surrounded himself with than a Hitler himself.

I've also heard him called "Putin's Rasputin".
Kamran Heiss
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 1078
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 21 Sep 2013, 03:08
Ideology: Trotskyism
Party Member
Post 19 Nov 2016, 07:24
heiss93 wrote:
Dugin would be more like the weirdo Thule society occultists Hitler surrounded himself with than a Hitler himself.

True, he has the whole occult Harry Potter business going on. Himmler then.

Quote:
I've also heard him called "Putin's Rasputin".

That one doesn't work as well, because he personally resents Putin nowadays. He was jettisoned the minute Putin no longer needed his services as a propagandist, once Ukraine quieted down a bit.
Soviet cogitations: 12389
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 18 Apr 2010, 04:44
Ideology: None
Philosophized
Post 19 Nov 2016, 07:29
So Dugin can be reckoned as some sort of creepy Dietrich Eckart figure? Wonderful.

Reckoning Infowars among America's leading "go-to-for-truth" sources is like claiming the same for Der Sturmer.

Do Putin and co. really prefer to get their slant on America from such sources? Has Russia's vastly respected espionage network really come to this? Or do their reports simply fall on deaf ears? Sad.
Miss Strangelove: "You feed giants laxatives so goblins can mine their poop before the gnomes get to it."
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 1078
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 21 Sep 2013, 03:08
Ideology: Trotskyism
Party Member
Post 19 Nov 2016, 07:41
Comrade Gulper wrote:
So Dugin can be reckoned as some sort of creepy Dietrich Eckart figure? Wonderful.

Basically. With weird "Eurasian race"/"Eurasian global hegemony" theories that are frankly slightly more incoherent than Aryanism. A combination of Mussolini's "proletarian nations" talk that even the MTWs have mostly jettisoned and Russian Empire revivalism under the Soviet flag. Plus bizarrely unfeasible policy recommendations that require de facto Russian dominance over the targeted countries already. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundatio ... eopolitics

Quote:
Do Putin and co. really prefer to get their slant on America from such sources? Has Russia's vastly respected espionage network really come to this? Or do their reports simply fall on deaf ears? Sad.

RT interviewed the Infowars crowd pretty regularly before they tried picking up the "left of the Obama administration" audience that had nowhere to go after CurrentTV collapsed, bringing in Bernie-style Democrats like Thom Hartmann and leftists like Abby Martin. Programs like Hartmann's well-viewed and thus probably not going anywhere show aside, they've since shuffled their support from the left to the far-right with the rise of pro-Russian radical right groups like Jobbik, National Front, the Bannon/"alt-white" wing of Trumpism. Meanwhile, the leftist audience is increasingly fading to Telesur, and the social democratic one to the TYT Network, both of which represent credible media organs that are much closer to the views of each group.

So, they're back to having Alex Jones and Co. on regularly, and their claims are even more aired on Sputnik News which never had an educated left-wing audience that they fear alienating the remnants of. My guess is it's more a matter of useful propaganda than actually taking Infowars' claims seriously.
Soviet cogitations: 12389
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 18 Apr 2010, 04:44
Ideology: None
Philosophized
Post 19 Nov 2016, 08:02
Putin has always managed to be a defy manipulator of both the Bolshevik and Orthodox currents within modern Russian culture. When he goes, he needs to be replaced by a similarly strong hand, otherwise the two tendencies are going to clash.

I've always assumed the "alt-right" in Russia to be something along the lines of a slightly cleaned up NazBol ideology. I don't know its true strength or how well it would fare in open warfare with renewed Czarism or a showdown with the Boyar oligarchs.

RT is so scattershot. I've read some extremely insightful and useful articles there, as well as a great deal of laughable dreck. I don't know how mainstream they truly are within Russia itself.

I imagine that if Russia lurches further to the right, the choice will be between a corporatist oligarch of the Chinese variety or a total throwback to Orthodoxy and Great Russian chauvinism/separatism. Of course, a "compromise" figure could combine both tendencies, but it would be going a step beyond Putin to do so and thus risky.
Miss Strangelove: "You feed giants laxatives so goblins can mine their poop before the gnomes get to it."
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 1078
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 21 Sep 2013, 03:08
Ideology: Trotskyism
Party Member
Post 19 Nov 2016, 08:18
Comrade Gulper wrote:
Putin has always managed to be a defy manipulator of both the Bolshevik and Orthodox currents within modern Russian culture. When he goes, he needs to be replaced by a similarly strong hand, otherwise the two tendencies are going to clash.

Unfortunately, NazBol ideology is basically a merger between those two currents, where I'd argue Putin is ultimately a liberal conservative cynically manipulating those currents. The quiet consensus among both Russian and American analysts is that the power vacuum around Putin would produce a nightmare scenario were he to fall or die suddenly, exactly because something like NazBol ideology is best poised to seize power in its wake.

If he anoints an heir from within the bureaucracy instead, then you have something akin to the Caesarean system of government. What you've described as a "corporatist oligarch[y] of the Chinese variety," although probably run more by the security services/military/oilgarchy ("Russia stronk" and all) based on the composition of Putin's own inner circle. Rather than the bankers and industrial bureaucrats who have dominion over China, with its more sedate culture and resource-poor landscape. A reformulated Roman system works fine and averts catastrophe, until you get a Caligula.

Quote:
I've always assumed the "alt-right" in Russia to be something along the lines of a slightly cleaned up NazBol ideology. I don't know its true strength or how well it would fare in open warfare with renewed Czarism or a showdown with the Boyar oligarchs.

Its clean-up probably would include absorbing Zhirinovsky-style neo-Tsarist lunacy (they're not ideologically far from each-other as is), and making a concerted effort to appeal to the Putinist wing of the oligarchy. National Bolshevism is only Bolshevik in imagery, in substance it's fascist all the way. That could easily include winning support from reactionary elements of the national bourgeoisie.

Quote:
RT is so scattershot. I've read some extremely insightful and useful articles there, as well as a great deal of laughable dreck. I don't know how mainstream they truly are within Russia itself.

Oh, I don't know about Russia's own media, since I don't speak Russian. What I know is what they put forth in English-language sources. RT has always been a mix of interesting barely-talked-about stories and laughable tabloid-level "journalism," though most of the "great" content can be found in Telesur as well today.
Soviet cogitations: 12389
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 18 Apr 2010, 04:44
Ideology: None
Philosophized
Post 19 Nov 2016, 09:29
My Russian is good enough to get me on Vkonktake to chat with relatives, and bad enough that it got me to close my Vkonktake account after too much derision from relatives concerning my Russian. So I don't really have a good grasp of native Russian media.

I do know that most sources are extremely pro-Trump, which I'm sure is going to change once they realize Trump is someone's useful idiot but not necessarily theirs.
Miss Strangelove: "You feed giants laxatives so goblins can mine their poop before the gnomes get to it."
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 1078
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 21 Sep 2013, 03:08
Ideology: Trotskyism
Party Member
Post 19 Nov 2016, 09:38
Comrade Gulper wrote:
I do know that most sources are extremely pro-Trump, which I'm sure is going to change once they realize Trump is someone's useful idiot but not necessarily theirs.

Agreed. Considering the talk from Michael Flynn and Trump's foreign policy picks (Flynn included) being a coterie of rabid Iran hawks, I expect the Russian rapprochement to go forward for now because they intend to focus their efforts on Iran and fulfilling Dick Cheney's pipe(line) dream of controlling the Strait of Hormuz.

If Russia gets in Trump's way though, it's immediately earned itself a place back on the containment shit-list. I've said it before, but to reiterate: I give it two years at most. The international system is such that feathers will get ruffled, and that's not something The Donald takes kindly to. He'll respond aggressively. Meanwhile, the people around him are the most rabid corsairs from America's foreign policy elites; even they fear what happens with Putin's regime collapsed, they're willing to temporarily lighten up on containment, but they'd sure love to use that opportunity to carve up the Middle East.
[+-]
Soviet cogitations: 71
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 19 Jun 2016, 08:12
Pioneer
Post 19 Nov 2016, 16:19
I agree comrade gulper that Trump is an awful person, just look at his boorish behavior at the Al Smith dinner. Have you seen that? Does this guy have any class? He has run his campaign on boorishness and an adolescent petulance. His persona is that of an ignorant vulgar person. The bar for the presidency has been lowered so far that such a person can be elected means that even David Duke might have hope of victory. I would think just about anyone could be president now. This has the effect of lowering the prestige of the office of the presidency, although not its power. Of course in part I hope he fails because I don't like him or the people he surrounds himself with, and I would like to see them fall on their face. Can anything good come out of electing a clown into office? There is no precedent for this level of farce in the US. It's like an experiment.
Soviet cogitations: 12389
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 18 Apr 2010, 04:44
Ideology: None
Philosophized
Post 19 Nov 2016, 17:12
"Apologize!" will be to Trump as "Well..." was to Reagan and "Read my lips!" was to GHW Bush.

It's the next great meme phrase, one that amply suits this era of PC/anti-PC social media-derived discourse.

Years from now, people are going to look back on the first few decades of social media and laugh at how discombobulating to the general perspective the transition was.
Miss Strangelove: "You feed giants laxatives so goblins can mine their poop before the gnomes get to it."
Alternative Display:
Mobile view
More Forums: The History Forum. The UK Politics Forum.
© 2000- Soviet-Empire.com. Privacy.
cron