Political Discussion Thread (With Rules)

[Dr. MID-Nite]

On 10/21/2021 at 11:58 PM, Lectryk said:

 

You'd rather see nothing at all, than something? 

 

I wouldn't call 1.9 TRILLION in new spending a cut back, I'd call it a good start; this is all new spending, spending that doesn't exist right now, spending that will help Americans.  If the Democrats can deliver on that, they can springboard off that success in the second half of his term and get another 2 trillion in new spending.  Haven't you ever heard the quote 'The art of politics is the possible...'?  Or, 'Half a loaf is better than none'?  If everything and the kitchen sink isn't possible right now, then cut back til something is - your party can do whatever it wants, ffs - they control the entire process (until the mid term losses caused by their inability to deliver anything)!   They don't need Republicans!  Republicans aren't the problem here!  But the Democrats sure are a long way down the road to getting nothing at all, which will hurt America more than not passing SOME amount of new spending to address SOME of the the issues Progressives claim to care about.  

 

You want to be disappointed in something?  Be disappointed in the Progressives who demand so much, they kill the chances of getting progress.  Because it's not America cutting their chances this term, it's themselves.

 

 

 

 

 

 

And...as I said...this partial measure will be presented as a Democrat failure by the Reps and the Right in general and used as talking point to flip seats in Congress in 2024 and beyond. If it all gets rolled back in 2024 then all of the effort was for nothing. And it is open to debate that progressives are "demanding too much". Health care for example...most Americans want some sort of universal health care. So when progressives are advocating for that, it's what the populace wants. As far as the infrastructure bill, anyone with a lick of common sense knows that the country's infrastructure needs far most invested in it than even what was initially presented in the bill. So again, not seeing where this "progressives are too demanding" narrative is coming from. It's literally the opposite, reactionaries are demanding way too much on their end...against the will of Americans...the majority of whom support this bill. And the perception that the Dems aren't going to "deliver" as you say is exactly why they shouldn't settle for anything less than the full bill. Anything less will be seen as a failure....as I already said initially. Progressives are the majority in this country. We shouldn't be making all the compromises. The reactionaries sure as hell didn't give any concessions to progressives when they were in control.

[Cygnia]

Jan. 6 Protest Organizers Say They Participated in ‘Dozens’ of Planning Meetings With Members of Congress and White House Staff

[Iuz the Evil]

When you are governing with a very slim majority (and votes determine that, this is a very divided nation), if you cannot form coalitions with the more moderate elements of your own party you are not going to govern for long. 2024? There will be no more majority in 2022, historical precedent and a bunch of problems (only some of which are the responsibility of the current governing majority - but for sure all are their responsibility to address) will see to that.

 

Sinema and Manchin may get voted out, as some folks are advocating for. They will not be replaced by more progressive individuals. One of them flips the Senate back the other way.
 

It is all very frustrating to watch for both more progressive and more moderate Democrats. But I’m pretty confident at this point the mid terms, even a year away, are going to be a bloodbath for the governing party.

 

 Edit: it’s interesting that I used to describe myself as “way way too socialist and left leaning to run for office”. My positions haven’t really changed, but I’m definitely moderate now… new issues and far more progressive stances than my own leave me wondering what is going on. Guess I just got old and they moved further on and added new issues that don’t appeal to me as much.

[Pariah]

Trying to describe oneself in terms of political alignment is sheer folly anymore. I think of myself as a moderate, perhaps even slightly right-leaning (fiscal responsibility, small government, etc.), but because I also advocate for science, a lot of people I know on the right think I'm a socialist.

[Lord Liaden]

Dr. MID-Nite, this dovetails neatly with what you're saying.

 

 

[Pariah]

I have no words. Well, none that can be posted here.

 

Donald Trump Jr. is selling shirts that say 'guns don't kill people, Alec Baldwin kills people' after Halyna Hutchins death

[unclevlad]

53 minutes ago, Pariah said:

I have no words. Well, none that can be posted here.

 

Donald Trump Jr. is selling shirts that say 'guns don't kill people, Alec Baldwin kills people' after Halyna Hutchins death

 

How about...yeah, this is him finding his natural level...

[Dr. MID-Nite]

I just really don't want to go through Trump 2.0. Weird I know...

[Lord Liaden]

I wonder if Donald Senior would have kissed his own father's ass this long and hard had his father lived longer?

[Cygnia]

‘When do we get to use the guns?’: TP USA audience member asks Charlie Kirk when can ‘we kill’ Democrats?

[Pariah]

38 minutes ago, Cygnia said:

‘When do we get to use the guns?’: TP USA audience member asks Charlie Kirk when can ‘we kill’ Democrats?

 

From the article:

Quote

"They fear – let me say this very clearly – they fear us holding the line with self-control and discipline...."

 

Untrue. As for me, Mr. Kirk, I have no fear of that whatsoever. Because I've seen precisely zero evidence that you and your rat-b@st@rd idol-figure have any capacity whatsoever for self-control and/or discipline. How you've evolved speech and language centers when your brains are still so largely reptilian is quite beyond me. 

 

Go ahead, prove me wrong. Demonstrate that you have the capacity to operate on higher than a fight-or-flight mentality, that you can reason and communicate and listen to others.

 

I'll wait.

[DShomshak]

Here in Washington State, the big political news of the day is that our Secretary of State, Kim Wyman, is quitting to take a job in the Biden Administration: the Homeland Security office overseeing election security. She is well qualified for the job, having overseen Washingto0n's transition to all vote-by-mail and -- thanks to which, 2020's election came off smooth as silk. She's also been a notable critic of Trump's Big Lie.

 

Sec'y Wyman is also the last Republican elected to statewide office on the entire West Coast. Many of my fellow Democrats will miss her. I can only hope that Biden can find jobs for other Republicans who have refused to join the Party of Trump.

 

Dean Shomshak

[Iuz the Evil]

11 minutes ago, DShomshak said:

Here in Washington State, the big political news of the day is that our Secretary of State, Kim Wyman, is quitting to take a job in the Biden Administration: the Homeland Security office overseeing election security. She is well qualified for the job, having overseen Washingto0n's transition to all vote-by-mail and -- thanks to which, 2020's election came off smooth as silk. She's also been a notable critic of Trump's Big Lie.

 

Sec'y Wyman is also the last Republican elected to statewide office on the entire West Coast. Many of my fellow Democrats will miss her. I can only hope that Biden can find jobs for other Republicans who have refused to join the Party of Trump.

 

Dean Shomshak

I have been reading up on Secretary Wyman, she seems a woman of personal integrity and strong conviction regardless of her party. Given the enormous pressure exerted by the current incarnation of her party, I’m reminded of:

 

”When the mob and the press and the whole world tell you to move, your job is to plant yourself like a tree by the river of truth, and tell the whole world 'No, You Move.”

 

Good for her, we need more politicians like that.

[assault]

4 hours ago, Iuz the Evil said:

"When the mob and the press and the whole world tell you to move, your job is to plant yourself like a tree by the river of truth, and tell the whole world 'No, You Move.”

 

I'm not a big fan of this quote. It's the kind of thing a Covidiot would say.

 

I've run into too many stubborn people who will die in a ditch over a wrong opinion.

 

On the other hand, if you actually are right...

[Lord Liaden]

Right from the first time I heard it, I felt that line was a double-edged sword. In the wrong context it smacks of arrogance and stubbornness. For the COVIDiots the context is one of ignorance, selfishness, fear and spite. It made a difference that we knew that the character who first spoke it was motivated by honor, compassion, and selflessness, regardless of whether or not we agreed with him.

[Cygnia]

Fox anchor Neil Cavuto urged viewers to get vaccinated. Then came the death threats

[DShomshak]

21 hours ago, Iuz the Evil said:

”When the mob and the press and the whole world tell you to move, your job is to plant yourself like a tree by the river of truth, and tell the whole world 'No, You Move.”

 

"The river of truth" being an important qualifier. Not the swamp of superstition, the Magic Kool-Ade of pride, or other tainted waters. Unfortunately, not everyone wants to see the difference.

 

Dean Shomshak

[Lectryk]

33 minutes ago, DShomshak said:

"The river of truth" being an important qualifier. Not the swamp of superstition, the Magic Kool-Ade of pride, or other tainted waters. Unfortunately, not everyone wants to see the difference.

 

Dean Shomshak

 

Um.  Who decides if belief sets are Superstition, Magic Kool Ade, or  some other Tainted Water? 

[Old Man]

What about the Golden Shower of Conspiracy Theories, does that count?

[Pariah]

1 hour ago, Lectryk said:

Um.  Who decides if belief sets are Superstition, Magic Kool Ade, or  some other Tainted Water? 

 

Empirical data supported by peer review is a good place to start.

[Lord Liaden]

5 hours ago, Lectryk said:

 

 Ok, so - better nothing at all, than something towards their goals.  Gotcha.  You'd rather Reactionaries paint the Democats as completely worthless (and the Dem's have no successes to show, at all, to counter that), and have their base alienated by their inability to get anything done WHILE THEY HOLD CONTROL OF ALL ENACTING branches of government.  Very adult viewpoint towards governance.

 

The Reactionaries are going to be negative no matter what happens.  The Democratic party controls all the major levers of power right now, and they can't do anything with them.  They don't need the Republicans/Reactionaries to get things done, and yet.... they can't get things done.  ANYTHING they pass will be seen, and spun, by each side for an advantage.  Doing nothing at all?  Only one side benefits from that, and it's not Progressives.

 

Please cite your statistics and survey that state that Progressives are in the majority in the US.  If they were in the majority, the municiple, county, and state governments (where they have more impact, in theory), would look very different than they currently do.  People that hold progressive views should not be mistaken for people who identify with Progressive Politcians.

 

Here is what I thought is an clear articulation of a contrary perspective.

 

 

Essentially, we have one senator for the Democratic Party -- whose economic positions have much more in common with Republicans -- who is holding his entire party's reform bill hostage to the attempt to satisfy him. That is an untenable situation which doesn't bear repeating, and Joe Manchin needs to be called on it and take the consequences IMHO.

[indy523]

On 4/2/2016 at 2:16 PM, Simon said:

 

 

2. Lies or half-truths which are determined to be intentionally communicated on your part will not be tolerated.  You present the facts. If you're not sure of the facts, then you don't post.  If you want to post something that you saw and agree with, you will want to make sure you do your due diligence and research it first to ensure that you are not passing along lies and/or half-truths which happen to be in line with your political view. 

 

You expect a discussion of Politics without Lies.  Geez you are a weird one aren't you

 

3. Attacking of other forum members is subject to immediate banning.  Don't like what someone has to say? Great! Post a factually accurate counter point to their argument and make your case.  Discuss the topic, not the poster.

 

But Ad Hominem makes up at least 90% of all political arguments ever made.  They did a study somewhere I am sure.....

 

4. This thread is meant to be a place where ADULTS can have a SANE, RATIONAL discussion of politics. Posts which are viewed to be in violation of this concept will not be tolerated.  

 

No offense but what you have just put forth is the entire reason that the first amendment was adopted by the continental congress.  Whom do you expect gets to define SANE and RATIONAL and ADULT.  This is the fallacy of Plato's Republic and why every Utopian Socialist movement going back to Robespierre in the French Revolution ends in genocide of some sort.  In electing a class of elite political rulers trained in politics and morality to censor and control society they stand heavily on the third leg of the Cressey's fraud triangle RATIONALIZATION to justify whatever they want as moral.  One cannot have a true discussion of politics with rules allowing those in power to edit or silence others no matter what the reason.  That only opens a window for the clever and deceitful to reclassify anything they disagree with as hate speech and silence their opposition.

[Old Man]

You know that feeling you get when you're about to see something bad happen to someone and you can't do anything about it?

[Grailknight]

This comes to mind sadly

 

 

[Starlord]