General US Politics

[Shoblongoo]

Accurate:


 

6 hours ago, Dr. Tarrasque said:

If there's one takeaway from Manafort's sentencing, it's that there's different rules between whites in proximity to power and everyone else.

If there's one takeaway from Manafort's sentencing, its that Dave Chapelle was 10-years-ahead-of-his-time:

Anyone else remember this political satire skit? (i.e. an alternate universe where we treat street criminals the way we treat corporate criminals, and corporate criminals the way we treat street criminals?)

^^^
Also accurate. 

[Azure the Scale Tipper]

4 minutes ago, Shoblongoo said:

Accurate:

My words to those people:

I know you mean well. At least, I hope you mean well. But please take a better look into what you’re trying to fix. There’s more than one way to do it.

By the way, what were they trying to accomplish with those actions?

[Shoblongoo]

3 minutes ago, Azure in a Roundabout said:

My words to those people:

I know you mean well. At least, I hope you mean well. But please take a better look into what you’re trying to fix. There’s more than one way to do it.

...Explain... 

[Azure the Scale Tipper]

@Shoblongoo

I will try my best to. The three things that they are trying to do is for the benefit of the refugees, the poor, and others. But each and every thing they had to say was counter-argued, since things were better back then.

This was just analysis from the comic itself. I am trying my best not to dehumanize them. I am very sure, though, that there is a lot to refute with my statement. I will admit now that I may need more help with not going with my gut on these statements (especially given that you have a job that makes it a requirement), even after my locked thread revolving around the Vic Mignogna situation from a couple months back.

At his point, I need explaining far more than you do. So tell me, what more is wrong about my statements here? Heck, even tell me what is accurate about this to get it across if you must.

[Shoblongoo]

1 minute ago, Azure in a Roundabout said:

@Shoblongoo

I will try my best to. The three things that they are trying to do is for the benefit of the refugees, the poor, and others. But each and every thing they had to say was counter-argued, since things were better back then.

This was just analysis from the comic itself. I am trying my best not to dehumanize them. I am very sure, though, that there is a lot to refute with my statement. I will admit now that I may need more help with not going with my gut on these statements (especially given that you have a job that makes it a requirement), even after my locked thread revolving around the Vic Mignogna situation from a couple months back.

At his point, I need explaining far more than you do. So tell me, what more is wrong about my statements here? Heck, even tell me what is accurate about this to get it across if you must.

...I think you might have missed the point of the comic...

Sanders, Warren, and AOC are proposing policies today in 2019 Modern America to make the country more hospital to immigrants and fairer to average citizens.

These policies are today in 2019 being called "radical socialism," and dismissed as ideas that are just completely outside the realm of practical politics + going to destroy the country if they're ever implemented.

Said policies are more moderate and less ambitious than policies that had bipartisan support in 1959.

Thats the joke.  

[Azure the Scale Tipper]

8 minutes ago, Shoblongoo said:

...I think you might have missed the point of the comic...

Sanders, Warren, and AOC are proposing policies today in 2019 Modern America to make the country more hospital to immigrants and fairer to average citizens.

These policies are today in 2019 being called "radical socialism," and dismissed as ideas that are just completely outside the realm of practical politics + going to destroy the country if they're ever implemented.

Said policies are more moderate and less ambitious than policies that had bipartisan support in 1959.

Thats the joke.  

Oh, ok. Thank you very much.

Now, on another topic, I want to know what the Yang 2020 campaign stuff is about. I have seen some memes and heard some positive things about it. I just want to know how much this Yang is worth as a candidate, since normally I do not put stock in politics.

I will have to next year, though, since not only do we have a Presidential election next year, but also some Congressional elections for the state I am in as well (I will say now that it is Alabama, for context).

Edit: It is Yang, not Wang. I knew something was wrong, but it was only for the other reason. I misremembered.

Edited March 14, 2019 by Azure in a Roundabout
Misremembered some spelling.

[Shoblongoo]

3 minutes ago, Azure in a Roundabout said:

Oh, ok. Thank you very much.

Now, on another topic, I want to know what the Wang 2020 campaign stuff is about. I have seen some memes and heard some positive things about it. I just want to know how much this Wang is worth as a candidate, since normally I do not put stock in politics.

I will have to next year, though, since not only do we have a Presidential election next year, but also some Congressional elections for the state I am in as well (I will say now that it is Alabama, for context).

You mean Andrew Yang???

Yeah--hes a meme candidate.

His base of support if 4chan reprobates and  alt-right incels who thought Trump was actually going to build the wall. 

[Azure the Scale Tipper]

2 minutes ago, Shoblongoo said:

You mean Andrew Yang???

Yeah--hes a meme candidate.

His base of support if 4chan reprobates and  alt-right incels who thought Trump was actually going to build the wall. 

Mm, right. Should have known.

I still would like some advice on the effective candidates for 2020.

[Shoblongoo]

1 minute ago, Azure in a Roundabout said:

Mm, right. Should have known.

I still would like some advice on the effective candidates for 2020.

I'm honestly completely uncommitted on the Democratic side atm. 

Like I know I'm going to vote for whoever they put up against Trump. (unless they nominate the reanimated corpse of Robert Byrd or something stupid)

But I have absolutely no idea who I'm going to be supporting in the primaries. 

[Azure the Scale Tipper]

1 minute ago, Shoblongoo said:

I'm honestly completely uncommitted on the Democratic side atm. 

Like I know I'm going to vote for whoever they put up against Trump. (unless they nominate the reanimated corpse of Robert Byrd or something stupid)

But I have absolutely no idea who I'm going to be supporting in the primaries. 

Alright, that’s fine. We’ll save these discussions for 2020.

By then, I’ll be in college. Geez, Trump just became President going into the second semester of my sophomore year.

[Shoblongoo]

I guess at this point out:

I like Bernie. Hes been saying the same thing for 50 years now and saying it since before it was the hip-and-trendy thing to say: hes not a crook or an opportunist, and hes actually focused on the big problems facing the country rather than petty bullshit. I think he'd win every state that Hillary won in a general election and probably pick up some key states in the midwest--he could win.

I like Biden. I question whether someone as centrist as Biden can actually win a Democratic Primary right now; the party has moved so far to the left. But I like Biden. Also think he wins every state that Hillary won in a general election and probably picks up some key states in the midwest--he could win.

I like Warren. If shes the nominee the general election is going to be a shitshow of Trump throwing out "Pocahontas" one-liners, and I don't know how well she plays outside the liberal Northeast. She supports most of the same policies as Bernie, but she does it in a more heady and intellectual way whereas Bernie is more of a populist sloganeer. Populist sloganeer is probably a better messenger atm.

I like Harris. I know some liberals think its a dealbreaker that she use to be a prosecutor and that she put people in jail for petty drug offenses. I can overlook it--she understands its an issue and shes on the right side of it now as a lawmaker. Thats what matters. Again; I don't know how well she plays in a Democratic primary.  Between Biden in the establishment lane and Sanders/Warren on the left, I don't know what her base is. 

No idea why Beto is even running. His political resume begins and ends with "lost an election to Ted Cruz." Next.

Hearing  a lot of noise about Gabbard and Gillibrand, but I don't get the sense that either of them have any real traction.

No one else is worth mentioning atm.
_________

EDIT: lol I forgot Cory Booker

Guess that tells you what I think about his chances, doesn't it?
 

Edited March 14, 2019 by Shoblongoo

[Azure the Scale Tipper]

@Shoblongoo I will hope any one of the first 4 get nominated, then.

[Dr. Tarrasque]

Bernie's the best choice at the moment. Like Trump was in 2016, he's the most transparent of the candidates and the right is defaulting to their fear-mongering talking points to attack him. The populist platform won in 2016, it'll win again in 2020 if Sanders gets the nomination.

Biden's a gamble because he's got the experience or Obama stink depending on who you ask and he's just another corporate Democrat with his advantage being that he was VP. If he gets the nomination, expect lots of attacks on him being portrayed as a racist and the election coming down either settling for the establishment we're already sick of vs Trump.

Warren has good ideas and shows that she wants to look out for the common people but she doesn't have the recognition of the other 2 candidates above and her hesitation on medicare for all is hurting her.

Beto's in the race because he got a lot of publicity during his run for Senate and he does appear charismatic enough to gain support from millennials. I voted for him in the Senate race but will not vote for him in the primaries for the president.

Harris and Booker are both corrupt Democrats who are claiming that they'll remove that stink but still hesitate to support policies that are polling over 60%. They're basically Biden without the VP history.

 

https://twitter.com/ddale8/status/1106195813309530113

^ Sounds like Fascism.

Edited March 14, 2019 by Dr. Tarrasque

[Shoblongoo]

25 minutes ago, Dr. Tarrasque said:

Bernie's the best choice at the moment. Like Trump was in 2016, he's the most transparent of the candidates and the right is defaulting to their fear-mongering talking points to attack him. The populist platform won in 2016, it'll win again in 2020 if Sanders gets the nomination.

Biden's a gamble because he's got the experience or Obama stink depending on who you ask and he's just another corporate Democrat with his advantage being that he was VP. If he gets the nomination, expect lots of attacks on him being portrayed as a racist and the election coming down either settling for the establishment we're already sick of vs Trump.

Warren has good ideas and shows that she wants to look out for the common people but she doesn't have the recognition of the other 2 candidates above and her hesitation on medicare for all is hurting her.

Beto's in the race because he got a lot of publicity during his run for Senate and he does appear charismatic enough to gain support from millennials. I voted for him in the Senate race but will not vote for him in the primaries for the president.

Harris and Booker are both corrupt Democrats who are claiming that they'll remove that stink but still hesitate to support policies that are polling over 60%. They're basically Biden without the VP history.

In any event--we already have something in 2020 that we didn't have in 2016. An actual competitive primary on the Democratic side with a full field. 

I think so much of the frustration with Hillary in 2016 and the reason so many Democrats stayed home on election day came from the fact that she DIDN'T run against a full primary field, and didn't have to work her way through a gauntlet of candidates to get to the top. You had Bernie running against her in earnest and--that was it, basically.

It played into the sense that the system was "rigged" and she was a candidate anointed by party bosses--not chosen by voters. In a season where the Republican nominee DID run against a full primary field, and worked his way through a gauntlet of candidates ftw. 

Whoever the dems put up in 2020--this time voters should at least be satisfied that they went through the ringer. And that they earned it. 

Edited March 14, 2019 by Shoblongoo

[Dr. Tarrasque]

6 minutes ago, Shoblongoo said:

I think so much of the frustration with Hillary in 2016 and the reason so many Democrats stayed home on election day came from the fact that she DIDN'T run against a full primary field, and didn't have to work her way through a gauntlet of candidates to get to the top. You had Bernie running against her in earnest and--that was it, basically.

That's the first time I've seen this argument. I don't know, I think that even if you had a competitive field in the Democratic primaries and Hillary had won the nomination, the change would be so minuscule that it would only matter if it affect the results of the swing states. You'd still have the e-mails, the investigation, the environment where people wanted to see an outsider come into the race and Hillary herself claimed to be one because no woman's ever been the president. 

[Pixelman]

2 hours ago, Shoblongoo said:

-SNIP-

Biden has the potential to be real dangerous to the Republicans in 2020. He's an establishment working class guy that appeals to middle class workers, which can hurt Trump's odds in the midwest. If he runs a Warren G Harding return to normalcy type campaign he has a strong chance of winning the election, I think

But he has a history of "saying it like it is" that seems to turn people off. Some of what he's said in the past is really weird too, lol. Maybe its charming in a "oh it's just Uncle Joe being Uncle Joe" kind of way, but it's comparable to Trump saying stupid dumb shit as well

And I guess he's too old and too white for the younglings or some stupid shit like that lmao

[Etrurian emperor]

2 hours ago, Dr. Tarrasque said:

Bernie's the best choice at the moment. Like Trump was in 2016, he's the most transparent of the candidates and the right is defaulting to their fear-mongering talking points to attack him. The populist platform won in 2016, it'll win again in 2020 if Sanders gets the nomination.

I'm really hesitant on Bernie. I don't think America is ready for a ''socialist'' President. I fear all Trump would have to do against Bernie is yell ''He's a SOCIALIST!'' long enough and the moderate Democrate voters will end up voting Trump through grinded teeth while all the Republicans vote Trump to keep the dirty Commie out of office. 

America is not a left leaning country. If the (comparatively) right wing Obama was weakened by being a ''socialist'' then a self described socialist will get easily torn to shreds. 

[Slumber]

6 minutes ago, Etrurian emperor said:

I'm really hesitant on Bernie. I don't think America is ready for a ''socialist'' President. I fear all Trump would have to do against Bernie is yell ''He's a SOCIALIST!'' long enough and the moderate Democrate voters will end up voting Trump through grinded teeth while all the Republicans vote Trump to keep the dirty Commie out of office. 

America is not a left leaning country. If the (comparatively) right wing Obama was weakened by being a ''socialist'' then a self described socialist will get easily torn to shreds. 

The thing with Bernie is that he's proven that he's good at connecting with the blue collar working class. It could be a double edged sword for Trump if he keeps trying to scream that Bernie is socialist.

I'm probably being optimistic, but it might end up having the opposite effect he thinks it will.

[Dr. Tarrasque]

1 hour ago, Etrurian emperor said:

I'm really hesitant on Bernie. I don't think America is ready for a ''socialist'' President. I fear all Trump would have to do against Bernie is yell ''He's a SOCIALIST!'' long enough and the moderate Democrate voters will end up voting Trump through grinded teeth while all the Republicans vote Trump to keep the dirty Commie out of office. 

I think you have it wrong and you're playing into the right-wing fear-mongering. It doesn't matter a bit what a Democrat does or thinks, the right-wing will ALWAYS yell "SOCIALIST" regardless of context or proper usage to scare people. It isn't new, in politics they've always tried to scare people being against policies by calling it socialist and as it has been said several times in this thread, the most popular policies are social policies like Social Security and Medicaid. 

Let's not forget that Trump himself promised not to cut Social Security and that he was for universal health care and the budget he proposed would cut SS and Medicare. Everyone who gets news from sources other than Fox News would be aware and outraged at Trump breaking his promise about Social Security. Hell, his campaign promises were mostly what the status quo would call "leftist".

The Republican vote is also irrelevant, they're either going to vote for Trump because they love him or they'll vote against Trump because he's making Conservatives look bad. They're not going to vote based on whether or not the opposition is a "centrist" Democrat.

1 hour ago, Etrurian emperor said:

America is not a left leaning country. If the (comparatively) right wing Obama was weakened by being a ''socialist'' then a self described socialist will get easily torn to shreds. 

Says who? I'd argue that in the current state of affairs, more people in the US are left leaning than there are right leaning.

Republican Leadership? They're terrified of the HR1 bill that's set to make it easier for EVERYONE to vote and even call it a "power grab" attempt by the Democratic party. Making it easier for people to vote is a power grab by one party... let that sink in.

Corporations and rich people? Terrified of Sanders and AOC which is why they attack them so much. When it was reported that Amazon would no longer have its second headquarters in NY, an organization that receives funding from the Koch brothers put up a billboard attacking AOC for denying NY thousands of jobs. I've had conversations with people that are mildly engaged in politics and dispelled those attacks based on the Amazon HQ, the 70% marginal tax and the conspiracy theory that she's actually rich.

Common people? The policies that AOC and Sanders are proposing are doing quite well in the polls and the people are for it. The people that oppose it tend to respond saying they get their news from Breitbart, Fox News and other right-wing media. 

Obama wasn't weakened because he was "a socialist". He was a weakened by one party being dead set to deny him any legislative success and the other being less vocal and also engaged in the corruption.

After that, you look back at the midterm results: the house was flipped to Democrat control. Republican gained seats in the Senate but they were the safe party when it came to that in the midterms as Democrats had more seats up for grabs and the losses mostly on states that lean conservative. Let's also remember that Hillary won the popular vote, more people voted for Hillary than the orange turd and lots of people decided not to vote because nobody thought that Trump could win. People like that have incentive to vote this time around.

Accepting what the Republicans say is why the Democrats are such losers in modern times. Corrupt Democrats and Republicans abstain from talking about policy because they know they don't have much to offer to the people in their presidential bid.

Trump's a detriment to the Republicans in the 2020 election, not an asset (except for appealing to the racists). Anybody who voted for Trump because of promises other than the wall and his racism/bigotry has no reason to vote for him.

Bernie is an asset to the Democrats for winning the election but they don't want to admit that and they want to avoid it if they can because it also means the days of their corruption are numbered.

EDIT: A friend of mine just had his first kid born about a month ago. Here's the cost:

Quote

the original bill was $26,833.54 from the hospital
this is already a ridiculous number
if you didn't have insurance
you would receive this bill
the discount feels like bullshit
like a made up number
if this delivery was in Canada
$0
I could've drived to Canada, get her a C-section, drive back
total expenses
like $300 or $400 for the trip
There were other bills
that was just one
the total came out to be around $6,000

This is from someone who does not follow politics at all and his parents vote for Trump. You really think people will put up with shit like this forever? A vote for today's Republicans is an absolute vote saying you'll continue to.

Edited March 15, 2019 by Dr. Tarrasque

[Acacia Sgt]

Normally I don't follow much US politics, though this did caught my attention.

Guess it's time for a presidential veto when even your-own-party-controlled Senate says "no", huh.

[XRay]

I prefer the establishment, so I will go for Biden or Bush if they run.

I like Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez, but I am not completely sold yet.

[Azure the Scale Tipper]

@Dr. Tarrasque I have your back there. I will not vote Republican.

[Silafante]

11 hours ago, Dr. Tarrasque said:

I think you have it wrong and you're playing into the right-wing fear-mongering. It doesn't matter a bit what a Democrat does or thinks, the right-wing will ALWAYS yell "SOCIALIST" regardless of context or proper usage to scare people. It isn't new, in politics they've always tried to scare people being against policies by calling it socialist and as it has been said several times in this thread, the most popular policies are social policies like Social Security and Medicaid. 

Let's not forget that Trump himself promised not to cut Social Security and that he was for universal health care and the budget he proposed would cut SS and Medicare. Everyone who gets news from sources other than Fox News would be aware and outraged at Trump breaking his promise about Social Security. Hell, his campaign promises were mostly what the status quo would call "leftist".

The Republican vote is also irrelevant, they're either going to vote for Trump because they love him or they'll vote against Trump because he's making Conservatives look bad. They're not going to vote based on whether or not the opposition is a "centrist" Democrat.

Says who? I'd argue that in the current state of affairs, more people in the US are left leaning than there are right leaning.

Republican Leadership? They're terrified of the HR1 bill that's set to make it easier for EVERYONE to vote and even call it a "power grab" attempt by the Democratic party. Making it easier for people to vote is a power grab by one party... let that sink in.

Corporations and rich people? Terrified of Sanders and AOC which is why they attack them so much. When it was reported that Amazon would no longer have its second headquarters in NY, an organization that receives funding from the Koch brothers put up a billboard attacking AOC for denying NY thousands of jobs. I've had conversations with people that are mildly engaged in politics and dispelled those attacks based on the Amazon HQ, the 70% marginal tax and the conspiracy theory that she's actually rich.

Common people? The policies that AOC and Sanders are proposing are doing quite well in the polls and the people are for it. The people that oppose it tend to respond saying they get their news from Breitbart, Fox News and other right-wing media. 

Obama wasn't weakened because he was "a socialist". He was a weakened by one party being dead set to deny him any legislative success and the other being less vocal and also engaged in the corruption.

After that, you look back at the midterm results: the house was flipped to Democrat control. Republican gained seats in the Senate but they were the safe party when it came to that in the midterms as Democrats had more seats up for grabs and the losses mostly on states that lean conservative. Let's also remember that Hillary won the popular vote, more people voted for Hillary than the orange turd and lots of people decided not to vote because nobody thought that Trump could win. People like that have incentive to vote this time around.

Accepting what the Republicans say is why the Democrats are such losers in modern times. Corrupt Democrats and Republicans abstain from talking about policy because they know they don't have much to offer to the people in their presidential bid.

Trump's a detriment to the Republicans in the 2020 election, not an asset (except for appealing to the racists). Anybody who voted for Trump because of promises other than the wall and his racism/bigotry has no reason to vote for him.

Bernie is an asset to the Democrats for winning the election but they don't want to admit that and they want to avoid it if they can because it also means the days of their corruption are numbered.

EDIT: A friend of mine just had his first kid born about a month ago. Here's the cost:

This is from someone who does not follow politics at all and his parents vote for Trump. You really think people will put up with shit like this forever? A vote for today's Republicans is an absolute vote saying you'll continue to.

Wait wait wait wait

They have to pay for GIVING BIRTH in a hospital?

Now I am thankful for having social security.

[Shoblongoo]

1 hour ago, Silafante said:

Wait wait wait wait

They have to pay for GIVING BIRTH

All you need to know about healthcare in America is that for 6 consecutive years, the most popular show on HBO was about a high school teacher cooking industrial quantities of meth to pay his hospital bills

Edited March 15, 2019 by Shoblongoo

[Azure the Scale Tipper]

2 minutes ago, Shoblongoo said:

All you need to know about healthcare in America is that for 6 consecutive years, the most popular show on HBO was about a high school teacher cooking industrial quantities of meth to pay his hospital bills

Now isn’t that social commentary?