• A new LGBTQ+ forum is now being trialed and there have been changes made to the Support and Advice forum. To read more about these updates, click here.
  • Hey Trainers! Be sure to check out Corsola Beach, our newest section on the forums, in partnership with our friends at Corsola Cove! At the Beach, you can discuss the competitive side of the games, post your favorite Pokemon memes, and connect with other Pokemon creators!
  • Due to the recent changes with Twitter's API, it is no longer possible for Bulbagarden forum users to login via their Twitter account. If you signed up to Bulbagarden via Twitter and do not have another way to login, please contact us here with your Twitter username so that we can get you sorted.

American Politics Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Some notes on environmental policies and politics:
links are underlined, some in bold.
(so, not including any that are focused on climate information and reporting)
[Will probably edit this post later? really tired. but some content for now.]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/climate-environment/trump-climate-environment-protections/
Well-reported article.

[Placeholder for another summary article link I'm forgetting.]

Small note:
https://www.newsweek.com/epa-oks-pesticide-linked-lower-iqs-memory-issues-children-1552565

Again, a lot of work to be done in a lot of areas--
Including climate, (to note more on that here, with a new Axios article):

- Axios: Biden day 1 challenges (on) climate change
- SciAm: Biden stocks transition teams with climate experts

Biden's Day 1 challenges: Climate change
Biden Stocks Transition Teams with Climate Experts

Here’s how the U.S. can lead the world on climate change innovation https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/heres-how-us-can-lead-world-climate-change-innovation-bill-gates
(think I had a post with the major notes typed up, but maybe not in here)

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/planetpolicy/2020/11/23/around-the-halls-what-should-the-biden-administration-prioritize-in-its-climate-policy/
- A new focus on climate finance and risk management
- Include national and subnational actors in ambitious planning
- Better land use practices and infrastructure
- Create a green learning agenda
- Pivot from methane laggard to leader

___
 
Some notes on environmental policies and politics: [part 2/2]


https://sciencing.com/how-to-contact-your-representative-about-climate-change-13714007.html
__

Now that the Democrats should have the thinnest of majorities in Senate, the US government should be able to better cooperate on international climate plans.
(still quite sad that climate change has become a partisan issue in the US. among other issues that shouldn't be issues, like trans rights, which has always been comparatively partisan)


Notes on trans-Atlantic policies
Europe:
The Commission’s proposal to cut greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55% by 2030 sets Europe on a responsible path to becoming climate neutral by 2050. https://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/eu-climate-action/2030_ctp_en

notes on EU Green Deal, including the European Climate Law
https://www.politico.eu/article/what-is-the-green-deal/
 

A plurality of Republican voters approve of what happened yesterday.
Thanks for sharing this the other day. It's really late Friday night but I had things to do earlier in week and no mental bandwidth to engage in multiple places, too.
Personally, my main takeaway is--why do I continue to be surprised by the American population?
I have plenty of conservative friends. Nothing wrong with conservatism. And most of my friends who I heard seem largely to condemn the event at the US Capitol.
Yet there are more than a few who I otherwise very much respect who seem to find some measure of sympathy or justification to the actions? I'm still newly surprised by people I know.

Surprised, that is, at this particular set of stats from the link above:
1610184635452.png

71% to 21% isn't the worst. But 45%, really?

You’d think that, but the amount of people who genuinely think that the people involved with the raid yesterday were “true patriots” is genuinely horrifying. It’s better to just not have the risk of him running again at all. I say this as someone who has had the experience of witnessing things first hand inside the US, and as an outsider as well.
I remembered I saved a quote yesterday and had to look through the pages quickly to see what it was, and I believe it was this one.
Since it relates to the above commentary. It feels like US citizens keep breaking past walls of reasonable understanding and knowledge. And not just, say, 5% of the population. Closer to 20-40%, perhaps, on certain understandings?

And it's not all in line with political beliefs, but certainly some correlations exist. I'm thinking again of Professor Jonathan Haidt's model.
And obviously people aren't purely binary manifestations, but there's quite a rift in understanding in some matters.

Moral foundations model:
 
Honestly I'm kind of pissed at Twitter for how they handled this. Years of him violating the rules for harassing people and targeting specific groups, and even violence that resulted from his words, like Kyle Rittenhouse, the El Paso shooter, and the guy that mailed pipe bombs, but now they're finally willing to do something about it- and in addition to banning him, they also delete every single tweet, so now if you want to reference a tweet, you have to dig through web.archive or something similar, even though we know twitter has the option of making it where you can't interact with a tweet but it's still viewable.

Like, yeah, deplatform him, absolutely, but people are drawing up articles of impeachment and it'd be nice to see further charges, so maybe make it a little easier to cite quotes of him inciting violence?

I dunno, maybe the goal was also deleting retweets to stop the spread there and also stopping people from sharing screencaps, but still, it'd be nice to just have it locked up, rather than completely wiping it away. It feels more like removing evidence than preventing anything.
Absolutely agree. As with the comments from the last few days, of holding President Trump accountable for all his actions recently (and over the four years).
__

Reminds me of your document and some previous notes.
[Quotes post: 7129115, post: 7132167]

Excuse me for quoting myself, but I still think this should be done. (also, 5 pages ago and 6 days ago on Monday western hemisphere time, huh)
Ah yes, I forgot to mention soon to be former President Trump yesterday.

I still believe we need a repository for every thing he's publicly said, and a way to indicate veracity of major statements, (maybe with small footnotes explaining why any mistruths are mistruths?) Translated into major languages around the world. Archived [] for enduring proof of the types of government official and political person that he was. ([...])

For historians, political operators, and general public. We don't need any otherwise clear-minded apologists now, or twenty years later, or centuries later.

I would agree that this would be useful for people's he's worked with, too.

Sure, here you are!

A few warnings on this-
  • It's not 700 pages of different quotes, since my goal was to pull quotes demonstrating a reason against him, so some quotes are recorded multiple times. (For example, "nobody knows what a community college is" is filed under "Ignorance" and also a subsection under "A Voice for the Working Class" to show that he's not all in touch in working class people like he claims) There's also some sections at the end for general opinions about Trump [...], to deflect from points like "You just hate him because of his politics so you'll agree with anything bad about him"
  • I wrote this with the intent of using it on conservative family, so there's some issues that I skipped over because conservatives don't care about them, like climate change and transphobia.
  • [...] some places where I used screenshots (like when he quote-tweeted someone), so those won't come up in a Ctrl+F search. (They should be easy to find with the headings, though)
  • This isn't totally finished, there's a few spots here and there where quotes aren't sorted by time, where I don't have links formatted right, etc. [...] It's also not totally comprehensive, but, I mean, that'd be pretty hard to manage, haha.
 
Thinking about that time Twitter's CEO said they couldn't create a Nazi banning algorithm because too many Republican politicians would be caught up in it...

Yeah, it's good that Twitter is finally cracking down on them, but I'm not gonna sing praises to them for doing the absolute bare minimum.

Facebook, Youtube, Twitter, etc still need to be breaken up. They're heavily responsible for the breakdown of political discourse not just in the US, but around the world. Reminder that Facebook played a role in the genocide in Myanmar. They're all also responsible for the widespread dissemination of anti-vaxx and qanon propaganda. They need to be held responsible for all this.
 
Honestly I'm kind of pissed at Twitter for how they handled this. Years of him violating the rules for harassing people and targeting specific groups, and even violence that resulted from his words, like Kyle Rittenhouse, the El Paso shooter, and the guy that mailed pipe bombs, but now they're finally willing to do something about it- and in addition to banning him, they also delete every single tweet, so now if you want to reference a tweet, you have to dig through web.archive or something similar, even though we know twitter has the option of making it where you can't interact with a tweet but it's still viewable.

Like, yeah, deplatform him, absolutely, but people are drawing up articles of impeachment and it'd be nice to see further charges, so maybe make it a little easier to cite quotes of him inciting violence?

I dunno, maybe the goal was also deleting retweets to stop the spread there and also stopping people from sharing screencaps, but still, it'd be nice to just have it locked up, rather than completely wiping it away. It feels more like removing evidence than preventing anything.

Oh, but I also just learned that they've banned his campaign account, and some high name crazies like Ben Garrison and Milo whatever, so that's swell to see!

I literally didn't even know that was a site.
The articles were written and finished whilst they were in hiding, and Trump barely tweeted after that so they’ll have everything they need in regards to that.

And they have released a statement listing every reason why they banned him. It was mainly because of the terrorist arrack and QAnon planning another one, so they knocked him out so he couldn’t rule anyone up anymore on the platform.
 
While Trump, his allies, and his supporters bitch about how Twitter banning Trump violates the 1st Amendment, here is an interesting read.
View: https://twitter.com/businessinsider/status/1347795572527407104?s=19


Spoiler alert: It doesn't violate it. The 1st Amendment is about the GOVERNMENT prohibiting and censoring free speech, and there is also Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. This prevents "interactive computer services", like social media companies, from being held liable for what their users post, and allows them to moderate content as they see fit. His supporters will argue against this, but its key to remember that the 1st Amendment applies strictly to the government, not private companies.
 
While Trump, his allies, and his supporters bitch about how Twitter banning Trump violates the 1st Amendment, here is an interesting read.
View: https://twitter.com/businessinsider/status/1347795572527407104?s=19


Spoiler alert: It doesn't violate it. The 1st Amendment is about the GOVERNMENT prohibiting and censoring free speech, and there is also Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. This prevents "interactive computer services", like social media companies, from being held liable for what their users post, and allows them to moderate content as they see fit. His supporters will argue against this, but its key to remember that the 1st Amendment applies strictly to the government, not private companies.

Also that Trump himself wants to get rid of Section 230.
 
He's been trying to for a while, probably because of the part that allows social media to moderate.
When in fact, repealing Section 230 will actually cause the opposite effect, and repealing it will mean that moderation measures will be almost draconian as the websites don't want to be sued and thus pay extremely expensive legal fees. Or, the sites may outright cease to exist entirely.
 
The articles were written and finished whilst they were in hiding, and Trump barely tweeted after that so they’ll have everything they need in regards to that.
Well, that's reassuring, at least. And I imagine web.archive has enough reputation to be used in a courtroom, since it's accepted in academic environments, so it's probably not even a major roadblock, but it does still feel like they kind of swept stuff under the rug.
And they have released a statement listing every reason why they banned him. It was mainly because of the terrorist arrack and QAnon planning another one, so they knocked him out so he couldn’t rule anyone up anymore on the platform.
I figured as much, but it still pisses me off that this is the third terrorist attack sparked by Trump's rhetoric. (after the El Paso shooting and the pipe bombs mailed to people, and arguably fourth if you include Kyle Rittenhouse) It shouldn't take a third terrorist attack for someone to get banned, especially when they were already obviously breaking rules about harassing others, targeting protected groups, etc.
 
Well, that's reassuring, at least. And I imagine web.archive has enough reputation to be used in a courtroom, since it's accepted in academic environments, so it's probably not even a major roadblock, but it does still feel like they kind of swept stuff under the rug.
Yeah the wayback machine has taken several screenshots of his Twitter every day since at least 2015, so it’s safe in that regard.

I figured as much, but it still pisses me off that this is the third terrorist attack sparked by Trump's rhetoric. (after the El Paso shooting and the pipe bombs mailed to people, and arguably fourth if you include Kyle Rittenhouse) It shouldn't take a third terrorist attack for someone to get banned, especially when they were already obviously breaking rules about harassing others, targeting protected groups, etc.
I agree. The LATEST it should have been was after his cult tried to kidnap that governor a couple months ago. Oh well, I’ll take it at this point. He’s getting his friends banned too by trying to use their accounts haha.
 
I figured as much, but it still pisses me off that this is the third terrorist attack sparked by Trump's rhetoric. (after the El Paso shooting and the pipe bombs mailed to people, and arguably fourth if you include Kyle Rittenhouse)
Don’t forget Charlottesville and the Tree of Life shooting.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom