Le Pen is gaining in polls in first Run-off, Issues dividing the Left Candidates - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;51852342]You are intentionally ignoring the point. The breakup of Yugoslavia was filled with misery, torment and massed killings. We get the term from this period.[/QUOTE] We're not talking about the breakup of Yugoslavia, we're talking about a hypothetical breakup (Balkanization) of the Russian Federation in the future so it will fuck off and won't be such an enemy to the West anymore as it currently is. Taking a big country and dividing it up into smaller regions makes it much easier to deal with and to contain. That's the point. [QUOTE=Rent-a-BoxHouse;51852349]Once again, balkanization is an incredibly violent process, and it won't even solve your fucking problem - instead of one big Russia being mean to you, you're gonna have a hundred little Russias being mean to you, and also a massive fucking arsenal of stolen WMDs being in free circulation.[/quote] Balkanization is not inherently violent. Zilla keeps bringing up Yugoslavia. The problem there was that there were so many ethnic groups with nationalistic sentiments crammed together into such a restricting area (in terms of size I mean) that it was bound to result in trouble. That, and the economic fallout from Soviet Union withering and collapsing made things unsustainable for them. And it would solve a lot of our problems with Russia actually. Taking what is a huge country, a superpower, and dividing it down into smaller regions/countries makes it easier to control and to prevent from influencing us or posing a major threat to us. As far as WMDs are concerned, this didn't happen with the fall of the Soviet Union. There were no catastrophes or nuclear armaments being slung and traded around carelessly by the Ukrainians, for example. [QUOTE=Rent-a-BoxHouse;51852349]Because you literally said it in plaintext. Considering an entire people an enemy is exactly the brand of lunacy that Putin is trying to cultivate in Russian people[/quote] I also said in plaintext that I meant the government and its supporters, not literally every last Russian. I don't think you're an enemy, for example. The problem for Russia is that a lot of the people themselves do in fact support the government and Putin. That's exactly why things are as they are there. Like you said, Putin's a populist. He's considered to be an attractive and great leader by many Russians. Even so, that's no excuse for them to support him. The man is a warmongering autocrat, a murderer, and very much a threat to us here in the West. This is not acceptable to us. That's the bottom line. [QUOTE=Rent-a-BoxHouse;51852349]No, I do not support Putin. I just don't see how any of your solutions are gonna be any good both short- and long-term[/quote] What's your proposal then? Because we can't keep doing nothing. Sitting back and allowing them to meddle in our elections and to influence our politicians in order to not only weaken our individual nations but also to weaken our diplomatic relationships and alliances isn't acceptable. Do you know something we don't? Are you going to do something about it? [QUOTE=Rent-a-BoxHouse;51852349]How the fuck do you think bigger states break up into smaller ones? There is literally no fucking way to do it peacefully, especially to a country like Russia.[/QUOTE] Bigger states have frequently collapsed and been broken up peacefully. Collapse does not always equal all-out bloodshed and killing. The fall of the Soviet Union and smaller regions of it emerging as their own independent republics wasn't a dramatic affair (as a more contemporary example), the collapse and dissolution of the Austro-Hungarian Empire wasn't either (for a more distant one). Again, what's your proposal exactly? I'm hearing a lot of criticism, but no solutions are being made on your part. The current situation isn't acceptable for us. So what's to be done about it?

[QUOTE=Govna;51852363]We're not talking about the breakup of Yugoslavia, we're talking about a hypothetical breakup (Balkanization) of the Russian Federation in the future so it will fuck off and won't be such an enemy to the West anymore as it currently is.[/QUOTE] Fine then. Tell me, what do you have in store? Forcing people off of their land into arbitrary, indeterminable areas? Making ethnic groups move from their homes to a "set" state? Forcefully remove the historical identity of said ethnicities? Remove their ability to defend themselves? Choke their economy so their entirely reliant on others? Is this your idea? Is it?

[QUOTE=Govna;51852292]For the time being? We need to get our shit together. We need to make sure Le Pen doesn't take office, we need to make sure that people like Le Pen don't start taking office here throughout Europe and the United States, we need to get our national security situation under control, etc. In the long-term? I'd like to see us try to break Russia up. Again, Balkanization. Something which should've been done a long time ago. Whether or not it's possible, I don't know. But this current government it has and the people who support it, that's not acceptable. I'm trying to figure out why exactly people are jumping to such wild conclusions here. Do you support Putin personally? Maniac apparently does. Or at least he's more than happy to see Le Pen come to power because of how she sucks up to him and is against NATO and the European Union. Or was he just trolling? Reread his original post. It sounds like he wants to see us be destroyed. Again, sorry if I'm not a fan of world leaders and governments who poison their critics, invade other countries at their whim, meddle in my own country's election, and who are trying to destabilize our allies and undermine our diplomatic network. That bothers me. I know, it's crazy...[/QUOTE] can you name a single example of balkanazation that went peacefully without mass suffering and death?

*Brexit happens* United Kingdom: Oh bugger, how could anyone else be more stupid than we were with Brexit? USA: Hold my beer. *Donald Trump is Elected* USA: See, we're still the best at everything, even being the dumbest, nobody can be more stupid than us! France: Hold my baguette.

[QUOTE=Govna;51852108]Refresh your memory on history sometime. [B]They've been a nemesis to the West since the Bolsheviks.[/B] [/QUOTE] Sure, let's refresh. Russia was an incredibly backward and semi-feudal country in 1914, it's people were comprised mostly of peasantry, and most of them lived in abject poverty. 1.7 million of them died fighting an unnecessary war. Along come the Bolsheviks who ride the anger of the Russian people toward their government into power, and promise them a better future for Russia. Guess what? Early on, the Bolsheviks largely delivered. They pulled out of the war and got to work industrializing and reconstructing the nation. Woman gained suffrage and the right to abortion and democracy became a thing. [B]GUESS WHO COMES ROLLING ON IN TO SAY FUCK NO? YOU GUESSED IT! THE UNITED STATES[/B] (along with France and Great Britain). They launch a military expedition into Russia to bolster counter-revolutionary Whites (monarchists) in their civil war against the Reds (Bolsheviks). Needless to say the Bolsheviks weren't big fans of the western powers after that (though to be fair, the ideology of the Bolsheviks was also inherently antagonistic to the capitalist/imperialist west, so tensions would likely have existed regardless). Okay, history aside, I agree with almost everything else you were saying (minus the ethnic slur and the [U]genocide/regime change thing...what?[/U]). That Russian poster is a cunt.

The sad truth is that the Russian people have been fundamentally damaged by centuries of oppression. Russians don't understand what a peaceful, happy, reasonable existence [I]is[/I]. The last 1500 years the common Russian has been starved, killed, used as slave labor and then discarded like trash. How can you expect anything else but what you see?

Jesus fucking christ I dont like the Russian government just like I dont like the American government but saying Russians should be murdered? Really, Govna? I warned you your rhetoric would have dangerous consequences for you.

[QUOTE=Stopper;51852993]The sad truth is that the Russian people have been fundamentally damaged by centuries of oppression. Russians don't understand what a peaceful, happy, reasonable existence [I]is[/I]. The last 1500 years the common Russian has been starved, killed, used as slave labor and then discarded like trash. How can you expect anything else but what you see?[/QUOTE] There is no greater debunker of carpet statements like these than the free, open Internet. While some of our local russian posters hold views that would back up these types of allegations, we're talking about a gigantic landmass in which political dissent is bound to exist & transpqire in international outlets such as the one we are using now. I do acknowledge the perpetual issue of authority in russian regimes and how it has presumably shaped theperception of the government by the general public to this day but the alledged oppression did not affect every russian population & territory equally.

[QUOTE=Scarabix;51853087]There is no greater debunker of carpet statements like these than the free, open Internet. While some of our local russian posters hold views that would back up these types of allegations, we're talking about a gigantic landmass in which political dissent is bound to exist & transpqire in international outlets such as the one we are using now. I do acknowledge the perpetual issue of authority in russian regimes and how it has presumably shaped theperception of the government by the general public to this day but the alledged oppression did not affect every russian population & territory equally.[/QUOTE] It's not an allegation, it's just historical fact. I'm not talking about supporting Putin or not - this is way beyond that. It's a national complex and by now it might as well be a genetic deformation.

I think you drank too much of that propaganda koolaid Govna.

[QUOTE=Scarabix;51850783]I am getting very tired of this macron meme and cannot wait for it to die. Last time centrists were even marginally relevant was 2007 and we're speaking of modem, an established party with an actual program which is as of today also taking part in the elections. I cannot wait for this assuming fuck to flop hilariously. With so many parties running for office there's a snowball's chance in hell for everyone to get their spot in the limelight[/QUOTE] Well I mean you can dislike the dude (personally I have no idea who he's trying to cater to between his recent comment on Algeria and his comment on anti-gay-marriage activists having been 'humiliated') but to say that just because he doesn't have an established party means he won't be able to get the presidency directly contradicts the polls. He can still lose for various reasons but not being in the modem isn't one of them lol.

[QUOTE=_Axel;51853162]Well I mean you can dislike the dude (personally I have no idea who he's trying to cater to between his recent comment on Algeria and his comment on anti-gay-marriage activists having been 'humiliated') but to say that just because he doesn't have an established party means he won't be able to get the presidency directly contradicts the polls. He can still lose for various reasons but not being in the modem isn't one of them lol.[/QUOTE] Take all polls with a grain of salt and make it a great big , oléron swamp grain of salt. Unless centrism as a political current has considerably expanded since last elections then two candidates are now struggling to wrangle a historically irrelevant portion of the voting population

[QUOTE=thelurker1234;51850507]huh? in the us we had hillary who was basically a neoliberal dream who lost in the end. Germany has merkel who is much of the same and doesn't have opinions, going with what experts and popular opinion tells her to think, and she's losing ground, and france has plenty of centrist parties who are all dead as fuck.[/QUOTE] There's a difference between "sensible middle ground" and untrustworthy political opportunists who hide behind the label of "centrist" to avoid having to take any positions that might not play well with poll-tested focus groups. [editline]21st February 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Govna;51850790]Le Pen must not be allowed to hold office. This is a woman who sought along with the rest of her party a $30 million loan from Russia to campaign, [B]has repeatedly praised Putin[/B] in spite of his behavior towards critics of his regime and has denounced nations and people who have condemned him and the Russian government, [B]is against the European Union and NATO[/B]... basically would be a disaster for not only France but the West in general.[/QUOTE] Sounds like a major selling point to me.

[QUOTE=Whoaly;51853422]There's a difference between "sensible middle ground" and untrustworthy political opportunists who hide behind the label of "centrist" to avoid having to take any positions that might not play well with poll-tested focus groups. [editline]21st February 2017[/editline] Sounds like a major selling point to me.[/QUOTE] Sounds like you want to live in an oligarchic autocracy with no personal freedoms and a low standard of living, to me.

[QUOTE=Whoaly;51853422]Sounds like a major selling point to me.[/QUOTE] The fuck is your hard-on for Putin based on? What the fuck is wrong with NATO? You want more Ukraine scenarios in Europe?

Now I'm pretty young and shit, but I've heard that several times, the right wing had a little boost right before the election but always lost (as in, "recently"), so if what I've heard is correct, I'm not that worried about Le Pen winning. When was the last time we didn't have to vote for the least worst candidat, again ?

[QUOTE=maniacykt;51851909] It won't be exaggeration to say that Trump won because of you and all others that are like you. If you truly wanted system to be different you'd have done something long ago. You're just a lazy-ass hypocrite and you deserve it.[/QUOTE] this fucking meme of "trump won because of X, where X is what you are/are doing!!" never stops appearing

[QUOTE=Sebald-san;51853552]Now I'm pretty young and shit, but I've heard that several times, the right wing had a little boost right before the election but always lost (as in, "recently"), so if what I've heard is correct, I'm not that worried about Le Pen winning. When was the last time we didn't have to vote for the least worst candidat, again ?[/QUOTE] Worry not but do go and vote against her if you can. Inaction, apathy and misinformation are Le Pen's strongest weapons.

didn't trump win because lots of democratic voters or voters in general just didn't show up because both candidates were terrible to varying extents

Boy, and imagine that Govna called Conscript a Russian shill-conspiracy theorist. This is some next level shit.

[QUOTE=zupadupazupadude;51853616]didn't trump win because lots of democratic voters or voters in general just didn't show up because both candidates were terrible to varying extents[/QUOTE] There were numerous factors. But mostly this. They were so sure the system is going to give the win to Clinton that the result was a major wake-up call. I hope so, at least.

[QUOTE=DoktorAkcel;51853727]There were numerous factors. But mostly this. They were so sure the system is going to give the win to Clinton that the result was a major wake-up call. I hope so, at least.[/QUOTE] Mostly this? Based on what source? The fact that the rust belt broke for Trump is a huge indicator of what drove the 2016 election to the conclusion it did: Trump spoke to the working class, traditionally democratic voters of that part of the country who felt left behind by years of neoliberal economics. You're a moron if you think the average voter votes on conspiracy theories, the average voter votes on economics. [B]THE DEMOCRATS NEED TO MOVE LEFT ON ECONOMICS AND END THEIR NEOLIBERAL FETISHISM FOR FUCKS SAKE![/B]

[QUOTE=HappyCompy;51854385]Mostly this? Based on what source? The fact that the rust belt broke for Trump is a huge indicator of what drove the 2016 election to the conclusion it did: Trump spoke to the working class, traditionally democratic voters of that part of the country who felt left behind by years of neoliberal economics. You're a moron if you think the average voter votes on conspiracy theories, the average voter votes on economics. [B]THE DEMOCRATS NEED TO MOVE LEFT ON ECONOMICS AND END THEIR NEOLIBERAL FETISHISM FOR FUCKS SAKE![/B][/QUOTE] "Nah dude we need to respond to Donald trump by putting out even more generic, spineless, """""moderate""""" candidates. Afterall bernie and the far left are the reasons we lost :^)" On topic though, lets say on the very unlikely chance she wins. how easy would it be for her to initiate Frexit? Wouldn't that basically mean the end of the EU since France is a large manufacturing country for the EU? That's one of those things that sounds interesting to think about but not something I'd necessarily want to see in my lifetime.

[QUOTE=HappyCompy;51854385]Mostly this? Based on what source? The fact that the rust belt broke for Trump is a huge indicator of what drove the 2016 election to the conclusion it did: Trump spoke to the working class, traditionally democratic voters of that part of the country who felt left behind by years of neoliberal economics. You're a moron if you think the average voter votes on conspiracy theories, the average voter votes on economics. [B]THE DEMOCRATS NEED TO MOVE LEFT ON ECONOMICS AND END THEIR NEOLIBERAL FETISHISM FOR FUCKS SAKE![/B][/QUOTE] Actually The Dems need to build a coalition, Moderates for Socially Conservative states, Neoliberals for socially Moderates, and Progressives for Progressive states.

[QUOTE=OmniConsUme;51854462]Actually The Dems need to build a coalition, Moderates for Socially Conservative states, Neoliberals for socially Moderates, and Progressives for Progressive states.[/QUOTE] Social issues take a back seat to economic issues. I agree with the sentiment that a one size fits all approach is a losing strategy, but I'm doubling down on progressive economics being an overarching theme that [I]has [/I]to be pushed in all states and counties for the Democrats to be able to win. The Rust Belt is hardly a "progressive paradise" but they broke for Trump on economics. I'm not saying we need "purity tests" or a Great Purge of the Democratic Party, I'm saying we need to stop being the Diet Coke to the Republicans' Coke. We need our own brand, and neoliberalism isn't it.

[QUOTE=zupadupazupadude;51853616]didn't trump win because lots of democratic voters or voters in general just didn't show up because both candidates were terrible to varying extents[/QUOTE] trump won because he connected with poor working class voters, specifically in the rust belt of america

[QUOTE=OmniConsUme;51854462]Actually The Dems need to build a coalition, Moderates for Socially Conservative states, Neoliberals for socially Moderates, and Progressives for Progressive states.[/QUOTE] A big reason why they didn't win is because large swaths of normal democratic voters (working class) aren't voting democrat anymore because they don't feel like the party does anything for them anymore. Why should I, as a working class citizen, vote for someone who is just going to go with the Reaganomic status quo of things that isn't benefiting me at all and actually hurting me greatly in the long run? I'd rather write in memes or stay at home if my only choices are right wing and slightly less right wing (at least when it comes to economics anyway).

[QUOTE=Judas;51854494]trump won because he connected with poor working class voters, specifically in the rust belt of america[/QUOTE] well that's what I'm talking about isn't that a myth? didn't trump have much much fewer votes than other republican candidates have had? I recall reading that the reason Hillary didn't win is because loads of democrats didn't vote because they didn't like her, or something akin to that there was something going on with the amount of people who actually got out to vote at least

[QUOTE=Govna;51852077]. [img]https://facepunch.com/fp/flags/ru.png[/img] It's almost like Russians-- the people themselves as much as the government-- are enemies of the developed world, and we should've destroyed you a long time ago.[/QUOTE] You suggest killing around 150 million people. Can you think about how incredibly fucked up the idea is for a few seconds, and then slap yourself?

[QUOTE=Durandal;51854443]"Nah dude we need to respond to Donald trump by putting out even more generic, spineless, """""moderate""""" candidates. Afterall bernie and the far left are the reasons we lost :^)" On topic though, lets say on the very unlikely chance she wins. how easy would it be for her to initiate Frexit? Wouldn't that basically mean the end of the EU since France is a large manufacturing country for the EU? That's one of those things that sounds interesting to think about but not something I'd necessarily want to see in my lifetime.[/QUOTE] As I said, considering the Brexit referendum went 52%-48%, there's no way in hell a "Frexit" referendum would pass unless the EU starts assembling death squads or something. The anti-EU sentiment here is nowhere near the contempt you'd see from your average Briton.