Miscellaneous News

[Index]

I just LOL at those types of people because at the end of the day, when the shit hits the proverbial fan, we'll be seeing those same idiots inside internment camps joining with us WUMAOS. Hahahaha

As I see it, it's very overblown for Chinese in America to worry about being put in concentration camps during war anyways.

If they do that, they leave themselves with no way to deescalate and immediately set the stage that the war will be a war of total annihilation with no mercy possible.

The nature of the conflict means that there will invariably be a lot of American and America friendly civilian and PoWs in China's hands. A fair bit of Chinese have some relatives in US, and a fair bit among those are in the PLA or will end up in PLA from mobilisation. What do you think happens when PLA officers and grunts alike who had their children/uncles/parents/friends Holocausted by US whenever they stumble on some pro-American civvies or captured US forces?

So rather what I guess will happen (and the same applies to NATO civilians in China) is that they will just all have their visas cancelled and hurried back to their home country.

It's to the point where I'd guess the US government would deploy security units to mitigate overly nationalist Americans from doing pogroms until all the Chinese have left, because giving PLA frontline more license to believe it's a racial war of annihilation absolutely does not benefit US/US vassal frontline.

Not like it's 1930 anymore and it would take a long time to discover a genocide just by word of mouth from escapees.

 

[manqiangrexue]

Doesn't matter. Most people who are "political" made up their mind a long time ago. The debates are always for "undecided" voters. So yeah, Kamala pretty much destroyed Trump. Doesn't matter if you think the moderators are biased or whatever. From pure optics, Trump lost.

The main question to ask is in what way did Kamala do better than Hillary? Seeing all the signs out there now vs pre-election 2016, if Hillary lost, why should Kamala win?

 

[chgough34]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

What happened? I thought the secondary sanctions had cowed China into submission.

It’s a trial balloon to harm EU-China relations. It’s never actually reporting.

 

[AssassinsMace]

What did India expect that the west who already shipped al their manufacturing to china had any manufacturing left to give to India.
All the while the west is trying to re-industrialise you don't have to be a rocket scientist to see that India wanting to become a manufacturer super power is not part of the plan.

India wants to be a manufacturing powerhouse yet they don't even have the machine tools to be one. The West too expensive...? All at the same time they want China excluded from a BRICS monetary system. The next thing India will want is China to build their shipping fleet to transport all the raw materials they'll need to make the things a manufacturing powerhouse does.

It's quite obvious that India's strategy is to get the world to act like China doesn't exist. Indians think they're the key to why BRICS exists. Nobody wants to join BRICS because India's involved but you know that's what Indians have convinced themselves. Why would Russia want the Yuan excluded when that's been their lifeline surviving Western sanctions. China is the alternative for the world because they make the things that the West doesn't even make themselves anymore. That's why the West can't decouple with China. Can India say that?

Gandhi went to apartheid South Africa not to stop the evils of the apartheid white supremacist government. He went there because he didn't like how Indians were categorized lumped in at the same level as blacks and wanted to change that. And Indians think they're the natural leader of the Global South, a title that China doesn't even proclaim.

 

[chgough34]

Republicans are really sad to watch. They are based on a declining demographic that will eventually die off. They keep kvetching about China but they don't realized they cant even preserve their own party nevermind country.

The demographics R destiny is dumb (and it’s correlary - “the great replacement”) for multiple reasons.

1) Democrats win ~48% of the non-Hispanic white vote outside of the former confederacy; that going to ~45% means Republicans sweep all the northern swing states for decades given that even youth cohorts in places like Wisconsin are 80% nonhispanic white (for illustrations of how white voters hold ultimate veto cards over minority voters, see for example, Ohio’s shift to the right in 2016/2020 over the objections of black voters in Cleveland/Columbus/Cincinnati or California’s shift to the left in 2016/2020 over the objections of Hispanic and Asian voters Los Angeles/SF Bay Area)

2) the mere existence of nonwhites shifts non-Hispanic whites to far more conservative policy opinions.

3) Hispanic voter preferences are quite heterogenous and have quite low voter turnout. Texas is 39% nonhispanic white; Florida is 52% nonhispanic white - and both are quite republican

4) Hispanic voters being “nonwhite” sustained over many decades is highly questionable, especially given high intermarriage rates and reductions of residential segregation - after all, Trump had the best performance with Hispanic voters in 2020 among republicans, ever since exit polling became a thing, perhaps, because of his anti-immigrant animus. Heck, the new GOP stronghold of Miami-Dade County is 54% foreign-born. The U.S. has unique assimilation capabilities that even in places that are near supermajority foreign born can be staunchly Republican, only a decade or two after the immigrant entry into the U.S.

5) Even assuming everything above is false, the 1965 INA giving a heavy emphasis on family reunification means that immigrants cluster in 5-ish states (California, Texas, Florida, New York, and New Jersey) and the 30ish super-majority white states of the Midwest (North Dakota, Wisconsin, Nebraska, etc) would still give white people a sustainable majority in the Senate into near perpetuity (especially since states retain authority over land use - see Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency, 598 U.S. 651 (2023), and could de facto ban anyone from moving into their states by banning new housing construction)

 

[Randomuser]

India wants to be a manufacturing powerhouse yet they don't even have the machine tools to be one. The West too expensive...? All at the same time they want China excluded from a BRICS monetary system. The next thing India will want is China to build their shipping fleet to transport all the raw materials they'll need to make the things a manufacturing powerhouse does.

It's quite obvious that India's strategy is to get the world to act like China doesn't exist. Indians think they're the key to why BRICS exists. Nobody wants to join BRICS because India's involved but you know that's what Indians have convinced themselves. Why would Russia want the Yuan excluded when that's been their lifeline surviving Western sanctions. China is the alternative for the world because they make the things that the West doesn't even make themselves anymore. That's why the West can't decouple with China. Can India say that?

Gandhi went to apartheid South Africa not to stop the evils of the apartheid white supremacist government. He went there because he didn't like how Indians were categorized lumped in at the same level as blacks and wanted to change that. And Indians think they're the natural leader of the Global South, a title that China doesn't even proclaim.

It's just a sign of how they act especially in the corporate world. Always weaseling their way in and claiming credit of others.

No wonder so many western firms are in decline. They are a prime example of the management class that everyone claims is evil.

 

[HighGround]

The main question to ask is in what way did Kamala do better than Hillary? Seeing all the signs out there now vs pre-election 2016, if Hillary lost, why should Kamala win?

Clinton got destroyed in her debate against Trump.

Trump correctly identified aspects of Clinton that voters liked the least. Her involvement in dozens of conflicts. Her long career in politics, potrarying her as a useless insider. Her political correctness and her double standards. It was actually a brillaint piece of rhetoric, but Trump didn't really do any of it this time around.

Of course, the race is not over yet. We have two months before November, so keep that in mind. Lots of things can still happen.

 

[BoraTas]

She held her own better than Biden, wouldn't say she "obliterated" him. Trump was just his usual self, spouting whatever bs was most convenient for him at the time regardless of truth or what he'd previously said.

Edit: Changing my view because our friend Bridge is watching his NSA job go down the toilet:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1833691069860417997

Further edit: Poor Bridge. Salty tears all around:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The American Republican Party has fully embraced fearmongering, lying and racism as modus operandi. I rarely see anything from them that doesn't involve a conspiracy theory. The elections will be a good test of the American education system. Such a party should lose in a developed country.

 

[BoraTas]

The main question to ask is in what way did Kamala do better than Hillary? Seeing all the signs out there now vs pre-election 2016, if Hillary lost, why should Kamala win?

Trump was a much stronger candidate in 2016. He is older now and he has so many haters. With a bit better economy, a bit more speech coherance and no war in Palestine, Biden would beat Trump too.

 

[manqiangrexue]

Clinton got destroyed in her debate against Trump.

This is another exaggeration like the "Trump obliterated" claim.

Trump correctly identified aspects of Clinton that voters liked the least. Her involvement in dozens of conflicts. Her long career in politics, potrarying her as a useless insider. Her political correctness and her double standards. It was actually a brillaint piece of rhetoric, but Trump didn't really do any of it this time around.

Basically Trump went after character assassination on both Hillary and Kamala and they both out-did him talking about actual facts. People who don't like Hillary don't like Kamala either. Trump's strongest point this time around is that Kamala is sitting in the Whitehouse now, wielding the power of the presidency due to the senility of the actual president; if she hasn't made good on her promises and doesn't act now, why would you trust her to do so later? Liberal media sure didn't think Trump won the debate against Hillary and they don't think he did against Kamala either. They pumped everyone full of confidence that Trump made a fool out of himself and has no chance on election day.

Of course, the race is not over yet. We have two months before November, so keep that in mind. Lots of things can still happen.

The absolute most annoying part of your analyses is that you continously flip flop between, "It's over... Trump obliterated." to "Was Trump actually destroyed? No." to "So yeah, Kamala pretty much destroyed Trump." then to "Of course, the race is not over yet... Lots of things can still happen." I'd stick with this last one if I were you.

Trump was a much stronger candidate in 2016. He is older now and he has so many haters.

He had so many haters back then in 2016 too. As far as the nation goes, America became more and more split after 2016 with both more haters and die-hard fans for Trump. As for the democrats; they really don't like any of their own candidates; they just want someone who isn't Trump.

With a bit better economy, a bit more speech coherance and no war in Palestine, Biden would beat Trump too.

Younger/coherent Biden did it because he's a white male. A large portion of the US population who are Trump fans just want a white male as president. Once that's satisfied, they can start to think straight. Without it, they defer to their primal instincts to pick the guy who looks and feels more like what they see in the mirror.