General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe Bluff in Chess is called the Rope-a-Dope
Muhammad Ali invented the rope-a-dope, the definitive chess bluff, in his 1972 match with Boris Spassky.
The idea of a chess bluff is to play as if you have certain pieces, in hopes that your opponent will think you do have those pieces, and fold.
For instance, I advance a piece in a way that would be insane if there were not a queen or bishop in the diagonal protecting it, so my opponent is left guessing... does he have a queen or bishop back there?
He could ask, of course, but by doing so he would be running the risk of having to "go fish."
Chess is a very complicated game.
Now, in a political context we sometimes see a very special kind of bluff where you propose something unthinkable in hopes that the opposition will reject it.
What makes this kind of bluff so special is that the stratagem offers the player employing it no possible benefit whatsoever. That's what makes it so devilishly deceptive.
When the opponent sees you shoot yourself in the foot for no reason it projects a sense of immense strength... like you just like shooting yourself in the foot and don't care who knows it.
ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)1. Chess
2. Boxing
3. Cards
4. Shooting
It's confusing yet fun at the same time.
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)our grand administration is doing to us.
Aka. selling us down the river, or up the canoe without a paddle yet again.
God I want my Masters finished so I can get the hell out of this country.
Listening to this crap anymore gives me heartburn.
Ohh he's playing 11 dimensional chess...he has a plan...really!
ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)I am not sure what you are trying to say here.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)unblock
(51,973 posts)socialindependocrat
(1,372 posts)Another ploy - String a bunch of unrelated things together in a string that
appears to be an argument in the hopes that the reader will either
think that the writer is so intelligent that we fear that we have no hope of
deciphering the meaning of the post - or - we are strong enough of character
that we realize that the writer is an igit! (used by Republican'ts in place of actual
logic.)
If you weren't awake before - you certainly must be by now!
Whew!
MattBaggins
(7,894 posts)socialindependocrat
(1,372 posts)Historic NY
(37,449 posts)truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)though I will bet Obama is better at this game than any DUer, and more informed and has more help and assistance in playing this game, if that's what you must see it as.
But really it is the functioning of elected government with separation of powers. Winning the Presidency does not mean total defeat of all right wingers, republicans and freepers. They still have their say. We were glad of that for ourselves during the Shrub Administration. When we got Congress in 2006, we were able to stop more excesses of the freeper kind.
47% of the country were willing to have Mittens as President. They still live here and still have a say. So long as they can win any elections, they will have some power. If we let them get a majority again, we will be far worse off in that game!
pscot
(21,023 posts)is such a dumb idea. The reason 2010 was a debacle was not that Progressives stayed home, but that young people aged 19 to29 did. Seniors, on the other hand, vote in midterms. If PBO really hopes to elect Democrats in 2014, pissing in grandpa's mess kit is a very bad idea. Dumb. Ill considered. What the hell is he thinking?
treestar
(82,383 posts)In general they vote Republican to begin with. Seniors who vote Republican don't get to complain about this - they are voting for people who would do away with Social Security altogether.
And why are we against any cut to SS that only affects the higher earners? These cuts, before described as not having the amounts go up as much, were not proposed to affect the poorest. And they were tied to tax increases on the rich.
pscot
(21,023 posts)if the object is to localize the pain to higher earners. Why is the president giving Republicans a cudgel to beat him with. There is no political upside to this and no very positive budgetary result. It is gratuitous folly; premptive capitulation of the kind Mr.Obama dotes on. It is grossly offensive to his progressive base, and raises the question of whether he actually means anything he says. Oh, and by the way. I've been voting for Democrats since 1960. In that time they've done some stupid things and some really shitty things. But I never imagined a day when a Democrat would tee up social security for sacrifice.
JVS
(61,935 posts)Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)pscot
(21,023 posts)"all the president has done is attach his name to a hugely unpopular proposal. Lets recall that Republicans have been hoping he would do that for ages. As Ron Fournier wrote last month, in a piece suggesting Republicans might consider tax hikes if Obama agreed to entitlement cuts: What is the GOP incentive to deal? First, getting the signature of a Democratic president on a bill reducing entitlements would be a victory for a generations worth of Republican candidates. Casting GOP politicians as Granny-bashers would be harder to do after a Democratic White House tweaks Medicare and Social Security. Second, even token reforms by Obama in 2013, opens the door to deeper entitlement changes in the..."
http://www.salon.com/2013/04/05/new_poll_shows_many_hate_chained_cpi/
lastlib
(22,978 posts)I guess Bobby Fischer boxed with Joe Frazier........
This explains that "poisoned pawn" gambit Fischer tried in Round 1 of the match..........
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)with the bailout? If so, he's not a very good chess player, either that or he's playing against US.
Arkansas Granny
(31,483 posts)You can call it whatever you like, but I'm beginning to feel that we are the dopes being roped. Making some concessions is one thing, but giving in on something that benefits so many people is turning your back on your base.
Comrade_McKenzie
(2,526 posts)When they cast their vote for Mitt Romney.
President Obama is just being a man of all the people.
KoKo
(84,711 posts)NOT a Mandate for Change.. Just saying....
wandy
(3,539 posts)republicans will just sit there and wax the Bishop and if they can't jump the Queen, they will knock over the table spreading all the pieces on the floor.
Come the next game or budget cycle, they will run the same game plan.
We have seen this for over four years now.
Our side has little choice but to play a game of 'liars' chess salvaging what we can En passant.
2014: Get the vermin out of the house.
End the republican menace!
Basically it is time to Rook those republican buggers.
petronius
(26,580 posts)truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)I always thought in chess, that I could see all my opponent's pieces...maybe that's why I always lose. Certainly couldn't be my level of play...
hfojvt
(37,573 posts)Heffalump (gloatingly): "Ho-ho!"
Piglet (carelessly) : "Tra-la-la, tra-la-la"
Heffalump (surprised and not so sure of himself): "Ho-ho!"
Piglet (still more carelessly): "Tiddle-um-tum, tiddle-um-tum"
Heffalump (beginning to say Ho-ho and turning it awkwardly into a cough): "H'r'm! What's all this?"
Piglet (surprised); "Hullo! This is a trap I've made and I'm waiting for a Heffalump to fall into it."
...
Heffalump: "Oh!" (nervously) : "I - I- thought it was a trap I'd made to catch Piglets."
Piglet (surprised): "Oh, no!"
Heffalump: "Oh!" (apologetically) : "I - I- must have got it wrong, then."
The House at Pooh Corner pp 47-48
fredamae
(4,458 posts)taken our attention away from Keystone? Oil Spills? Monsanto? Exxon? TPP?
And Etc's?
Not that This issue doesn't deserve this response, it does--but if we're playing multi-dimensional chess, we'd better open our eyes a bit wider, peel back some layers, look at All of this from a different perspective and start multi-tasking?
KoKo
(84,711 posts)They are GOING FOR BROKE! Keep us on SS which is so Important and then on the Other Hand...have Keystone, TPP and the EU Trade Deal being done in the Background. After all they know the Progressives/Environmentalists don't have the Unlimited Resources to fight back...unlike Obama's Wall Street, Think Tank, Corporate Big Donors have to Fight Back
With CITIZENS UNITED DECISION the Supremes Gave OBAMA and ALL POLITICAL CANDIDATES the POWER to ABUSE the Citizens of the USA! Hey...there are so many who think this is a GOOD THING....how many are "LEFT" to fight back?
-------------
Obama's EU Trade Deal Would Include New Political Powers For Corporations
Last edited Sat Apr 6, 2013, 01:40 PM USA/ET - Edit history (3)
Zach Carter
Posted: 04/03/2013 7:30 am ED
WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration is pursuing a free trade agreement with the European Union that would grant corporations new political power to challenge an array of regulations both at home and abroad, according to an administration official involved in the negotiations.
While the plan is still in its early stages, the effort alarms consumer and environmental advocates who worry it will lead to a rollback of important rules and put multinational companies on the same political plane as sovereign nations.
If states are unable to pass and enforce laws within their borders, it could change the nature of their community and government, nonprofit groups emphasize. Exactly how broad these corporate political powers will be is undetermined, but one aspect of the agreement, known as "investor-state dispute resolution," would allow a company to appeal a regulatory rule or law to an international court, most likely the World Bank. The international body would be given authority to impose economic sanctions against any country that violated its verdict, including the United States.
"The dirty little secret about is that it is not mainly about trade, but rather would target for elimination the strongest consumer, health, safety, privacy, environmental and other public interest policies on either side of the Atlantic," said Lori Wallach, director of Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch. "The starkest evidence ... is the plan for it to include the infamous investor-state system that empowers individual corporations and investors to skirt domestic courts and laws and drag signatory governments to foreign tribunals."
----
MORE AT:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/04/eu-trade-deal_n_2994410.html