U.S. Politics

You should really watch him get taken down by Andrew Neil and then throw his toys out the pram and storm off :joy::rofl:

Lmao at Shapiro calling Neil left wing :joy::rofl:

1 Like

I’ll never get over this haha

2 Likes

What a bozo.

Ben Shaprio also does a lot of the “oooh debate me you coward!” nonsense online which is so tiresome. I honestly don’t understand why people think he’s smart. I’m also a short Jewish guy, if I talk at 1.5x speed and spew a lot of nonsense can I have a radio show too?

5 Likes

It depends how good you are at regurtitating and defending right wing talking points and how little value you have for the truth

2 Likes

Right wing talking points make me want to vomit, does that count?

Bit harsh tbh.

I think Ben is one of the more rational/ sane american conservative commentators.

Anybody who enters into that kinda of space, either left or right, has to engage in a level of intellectual dishonesty to some extent.

2 Likes

Yeah he looks more normal stacked next to some of the nimrods at Newsmax or OAN. But the bar is so low on the right imo.

Agree, even in that Andrew Neil video, Ben Shapiro explained his departure from Breitbart (or whatever) that he did so because his colleague was not backed by the firm against the misbehaviour from Trump’s executive.

It’s just the nature of opinion based career where you need to do or say everything that your audience desires

1 Like

I think so, sounds like what Ben Shapiro actually does. Vomits right wing talking points so they spew out all over us.

1 Like

Here’s the thing. He’s not wrong, at least not from his perspective. Because all this demonstrates is just how far US politics has shifted to the right, that Andrew O’Neill is actually to the left of someone like Shapiro.

You get the same thing with the DNC. Shapiro, and others like him, will call them liberals and lefties, when they are nothing of the kind. They’re just not as conservative as the Republicans.

2 Likes

American politics has illusions of left and right wing and democracy itself. In reality it’s a corrupt oligarchy, where politicians perform the bidding of the billionaires. The media perform the bidding of billionaires, as mainstream media is owned by billionaires. There’s very few differences in political positions from either party. Many commentators believe ‘Russia Gate’ was to distract from the lack of policy differences. The same with identity politics.

Most Americans surveryed have policy positions way to the left of the leftist Democratic politicians. We know this because more than 50% of Americans want Medicare For All. Yet OAC and the squad could have forced a vote on Medicare For All and chose not too.

At the same time Trump’s election policy promises in 2016 is far to the left of The Democrats. He promised to bring troops home and end wars, he said every American’s healthcare should be covered. Even his protectionist taxes of imports is in theory to the left. His promise to bring jobs back is speaking out to the working classes and something neither party do the rest of the time.

1 Like

I think the political left ended with Nader.

It has to do with our winner take all system. I love a good parliamentary system where you can have more single issue parties and true left policies. You can also have things like a no confidence vote end a government early. It creates some instability but you could see a world where a fascist dabbler like Trump has his coalition dissolve early in his term.

2 Likes

Just my opinion but the “system” isn’t really the issue, it’s the electorate willing to standby and watch bad actors continue to abuse it for their own side to gain with zero regard for the damage done to the wider system.

The original emphasis of the USA was based on states rights, what happens in your state was always meant to be much more significant and impactful on you as a resident and individual rather than whatever happens at the FG level domestically.

The issue is over the last 150 years the FG has gained/taken an excessive amount of power beyond its constitutional remit in order to address the big issues of the political supporters of whichever side is in charge.

The FG was never intended to be this big or powerful, presidents are de facto kings who exert greater levels of influence and impact over the other branches when there’s meant to be true separation between the legislature and Courts.

This has allowed rabid partisans to enter the process and continue to degrade the system. People want to use the FG as a weapon to club their political opponents with. The progression of the Supreme Court over the last 30 years is a very good example of this, now the Dems are in power expansion of the Court is on the table because the GOP “packed” it under trump, the GOP could do this because the Dems had removed the need for 2/3 senate consensus previously required in response to GOP obstructionism.

It’s the electorate’s fault you stood by and allowed your side to abuse the system for your own gain. The system is purely reflective of the people who actively partake with it

1 Like

Ben Shapiro :clown_face:

2 Likes

I think he gave a bit too much personal info away there

1 Like

Utter horseshit on so many levels. Money in politics, ie corruption, is the main issue on all levels in American politics. Make corruption illegal and you make the American political system infinitely better.

The Fed Gov conservative talking point is a nonsense. Conservatives and Dems look to expand the FG military expansion time after time because they get bribed by arms companies. Meanwhile both parties vote for Corporate Welfare because they are bribed by these corporations. That’s the main issue with spending on a federal level in the US. I would agree spending on this function should be cut by 95%, it’s completely unnecessary.

States rights is a political codeword to allow southern states to use racist state politics btw. There was a bit of an argument of ‘states rights’ during the American Civil War. After that states rights, was a peace treaty to allow them to be racists.

Also your take on ‘Presidents being defacto kings’ is more ignorant bullshit. The President does not actually have that much power. Which shows what bullshit your Federal Government argument is, in turn.

As for the horseshit hottake that is ‘rabid partisons degrading the system’. They all have the same political position regardless of party, so that’s more complete nonsense from yourself.

1 Like

I don’t get why you’re heated?

There’s literally no need for expletives or inflammatory language in response to my take.

2 Likes

Okay, I don’t want to insult you if you’re being sincere. But if you are, I think you’re taken a re-packaged propoganda piece and fallen for it. So it annoyed me on that level

Fair enough if you disagree for what ever reason but I think you are capable of communicating your thoughts without malice and in good faith?

1 Like