Politics Thread


Tell him to be careful of the “militia” stealing his shit



He’s not going, he’s stuck at base mowing lawns. Since his half of the battalion went to Syria they decided to let them continue to mow lawns. He’s pissed because he has GQ on Monday and doesn’t want to do it.


Trump supporters believe that the migrants have been coached to request asylum and that most of them are coming because they want to make money, not because they’re fleeing persecution. If they can get past the border however, and say the magic word ‘asylum’ they get free health care and a lawyer at taxpayer expense, and if they bring a child with them, then because of the Flores agreement they get released into the US and can disappear without ever showing up to their asylum hearing. This infuriates a lot of Trump supporters. So the plan is to stop them from finding a way across the border illegally. I know there is talk of possibly letting them fill out the asylum paperwork and processing them on the Mexican side of the border, but an angry slice of his supporters don’t want to allow anyone in, and he’s pandering to them in his rhetoric in order to increase voter turn out.

Given that Trump hasn’t caused them any harm yet, and is perfectly within his authority to guard the border, it’s unlikely that the case will get far unless it goes before a progressive activist judge who believes that the operation is motivated by racism and orders a halt to it. This would be a departure from traditional jurisprudence because the judiciary has historically given presidential motivations the benefit of the doubt as long as they are acting in a legitimate state interest, and enforcing immigration law is a legitimate state interest. the migrants do not have a right to unlawfully enter the US. So odds are extremely high that Trump would be able to get any decision against him quickly overturned on appeal. Now if he were to actually refuse to honor asylum requests with fair hearings -after- the migrants entered the US, as some of his rhetoric has implied, that would be a different matter…


Unfortunately for us, both over here and in the US enforcement of labour and anti-trust/competition law hardly seems to be afforded the same courtesy.
Want to really curtail fortune seeking migration do zero tolerance and three-strikes enforcement of labour law coupled with clear rules for and clear communication to the public about the temporary and skilled workers our societies do need and of course have them immigrate and work legally. A new round of trust and monopoly busting as well as nationalizing those sectors where competition in a free market is practically or physically impossible would all do wonders for moving away from the current high-finance driven “trickle down” form of crony “capitalism”.

I don’t know, I do know the US has played a very dubious role in often making the situation in the countries some of those migrants come from significantly worse. Hillary and Honduras comes to mind, though I don’t know what if anything Trump and his administration have been up to in South America.



Hello, everyone. If you don’t mind, I’d like to make a comment on the 2018 general election, especially considering how I think international media never really gets the nuances of our wildly complicated political system right.

I think it’s safe to define Bolsonaro (which our media hasn’t been doing) as a far-right candidate, one that has, intentionally or not, supported the use of violence, censorship and the uglier aspects of our national character. His rhethoric is rooted around the idea that the PT is a far-left party made of commies (it isn’t), that Lula and Dilma were dictators (they weren’t) and is generally entrenched by lies and contradictions.

At the same time, a few papers seem to point that Bolsonaro’s win can be charted to the anti-PT sentiment. I’d disagree. The PT, for all its wrongs, had elected four governors and the biggest bloc in the chamber of deputies (56, if I’m not mistaken). In second-round projections, Bolsonaro also had good performances against other candidates, like Marina Silva and Geraldo Alckmin. Despite having a president impeached and another in jail, the PT managed to reach the second round of votings and build an arguably strong legislative group.

That’s not to say that I support them, if anything. Lula’s tenure as president had been a moment of various contradictions. At the same time, I think it’s fair to argue with the Worker’s Party, but for things that they actually did while in power. The PT, despite its many flaws, never attacked democratic institutions. I mean, Lula nominated Joaquim Barbosa and then he (Barbosa, I mean) put the strongmen of Lula’s first government (like, say, José Dirceu) in jail. That really doesn’t sound like what an authoritarian left government would do. At the same time, I’m very skeptical on Paulo Guedes’s Chicago economics chance of changing the economy for the better. While we do spend a lot paying the debt’s interests, his objective of “privatizing everything” doesn’t sit well with me.

I think Collor would fit the bill as a right-wing president.


Wow this is new.


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


Hey. I usually stay out of this thread, but I think I can say the following without getting flamed too hard.

It’s election day tomorrow in the US. So, please if you haven’t done it already take a little time today to find your polling place, arrange transportation, and schedule your time to vote.

Thanks. Let your voice be heard.


With respect to the militias on the US’s southern border, they’re acting as unofficial spotters for the border patrol and ICE who are stretched too thin along the very long and porous boundary line. This is nothing new. They’ve been doing this for several years now, but with the large migrant caravan very publicly now on its way, there’s no doubt an uptick in militia unit deployments. They’re not shooting migrants, they’re radioing in their locations as they attempt to unlawfully enter to Federal officials who can arrest them for illegal entry. Mother Jones did an article about it, embedding one of its reporters into one of the militia groups monitoring the border back in 2016.


“I love our troops. I respect our troops. I love our police, I respect my police. But I need a small armoury just in case those aforementioned soldiers and police try to oppress me.”

Also this.

Mein Kampf and Goebbels.

It seems that the Trump campaign has taken these lessons to heart. Not outright saying they are Nazis, but, they certainly perfected the art of propaganda.


Previous Presidents have often had their people lie in order to protect their administrations from the consequences of their mistakes, eg. Benghazi, and they’ve often controlled public narratives by hitting on the same issue in their own misleading way over and over to the exclusion of all else, eg, Iraqi WMD’s, the Nazi’s did not invent that, but previous Presidents haven’t been quite so bold in telling highly divisive and easily verified untruths themselves, at least not in my lifetime. In that sense Trump treads new ground. The truth value of his statements are immaterial to him, it’s their effect that matters. Most of his supporters dismiss those untruths as hyperbole. They believe his heart is in the right place. Most of his opponents on the other hand take him literally, and believe his heart is malevolent.


Benghazi was a tragedy and a classic case of government mismanagement. It’s always a tragedy when Americans get killed overseas. It is worse when it is because of incompetence. Republicans like to harp on Benghazi because it gets their base fired up. Not to mention this was cleverly stoked in an attempt to ensure they can flip the senate and continue their flipping of Congress.

Benghazi was a very clever use of propaganda to get Americans angry and disillusioned about the Obama administration. Was it as bad as Bush’s Iraq fiasco? No. Was it as bad as Lebanon under Reagan? No. Was it as bad as the American led coup in Iran that led to the Iran Hostage Crisis? No.

Comparing Benghazi to Iraq is not within the same spectre of reality. Because if it was as politically charged, the GOP would be out of power for a generation.

The lies Bush told to get us in Iraq has led to an open ended war that hasn’t ended. We destabilised the Middle East and ensured a never ending conflict that has followed me for half my life.


It was not my intent to compare the two, simply to use them as examples of different presidential motivations to lie. Nevertheless I don’t think Benghazi gained much traction outside of people who’d never vote Democrat any way. In addition, given that most establishment Democrats had voted in favor of the Iraq war to begin with, including Hillary herself, the Democratic party was unable to prosecute W’s administration quite so vigorously without making most of its congressmen/women and senators look like collaborators and patsies.


Holy shit they’re coming down here??? Fuck. I already have seen a few threats online towards my party, especially minorities like me that I chose to ignore, but at this point I am SERIOUSLY afraid to try and go to my local voting spot.

The first year I can finally vote legally I’m afraid of my life. Wow. Just wow.


I’m brazilian and I have to say that I’m quite sad with how our latest elections turned out, because in the end it came down to “I don’t like Bolsonaro” or “I don’t like the workers party”, fake news were the base of both campaigns and obviously hatred everywhere.
While economically Bolsonaro was most likely the best option, a lot of trust is being given to Paulo Guedes, socially we have taken a big step backwards. I really can’t see a context where you can be a bigot and it would be acceptable to society, but apparently a lot of people can :pensive:. Bolsonaro has been a politician for more than 27 years and yet he managed to portrait himself as an outsider, the weird thing is people bought the argument.
On the other hand, we have PT, the workers party, who basically destroyed our economy, corrupted the whole system even more, and had some pretty suspicious plans for the new government, if elected. But indeed, socially they are more respectful with the minorities, even if they are pretty violent against other groups of people.
Radicalism and hatred were the norm, and I fear for what may come from this election, because I just couldn’t see an easy, there rarely is any, or good solution to our problem. And it wasn’t just me, we had almost 1/3 of the voters abstaining or not voting at all.


Yep, welcome aboard this crazy train. Now that you got on, good luck getting off.

image https://media.culturalist.com/media/416a96ee408b512b049922a6ffb30dce.gif


My mother along with a big chunk of my family lived in Brazil between 1948 and 1965 and I have plenty of cousins there to this day. I’ve followed Brazilian politics off and on for quite awhile and it saddens me greatly to see Brazil still struggling to get its act together. It seems like nearly every Brazilian President ends up prosecuted for corruption. Americans complain about their politicians being corrupt, but the scale of the government corruption that occurs in the US is pretty small compared to what occurs in a lot of other countries like Brazil.


Apparently, the military doesn’t want them there.

If they’re only acting as “spotters” then I question why they need to be armed to the teeth.

No one said they’re shooting migrants. My concern is how long before we see that happen with hundreds of armed vigilantes whipped up by Donald Trump’s violent rhetoric massing on the border.