-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
2020 Democratic Presidential Primary | OT | Hickenlooper makes it to the debate
- Thread starter pigeon
- Start date
- Status
I feel like even a year or two ago I'd agree with the sense of basic decorum as a safety net but that stopped after about twenty minutes of this administration and an unapologetically infinite Trumpian safety net of McCain (who we should never forget also cravenly stayed silent on many issues) and Romney (humanspumebubble) respectability. But of course they simply changed respectability to republicanism. Not the reverse.
As obtuse and vain as the language the founding fathers used is, it's embarrassing that 250 years later everything is an idiocracy distillation of the stupidest of them.
Sadly yes. The momentum of those two shitty options is the weight and energy we should gamble on.
Yeah but if you don't nothing gets passed at all and you probably get absolutely wiped out in the 2022 midterms and then maybe lose the White House in 2024.
I struggle to think of a world where whatever democrat wins in 2020 doesnt get absolutely trounced in 2022
This right here is why I got involved in precincts after 2016. I've seen results for several dozen folks doing this locally, even if not enough. I know I helped some to directly flip a State Senate seat here at least.
The Rebel Alliance being an analogue for the Democrats is pretty funny/accurate since they were led by rich privileged white liberal humans and had no revolutionary program, just a desire to restore a corrupt republic.
Yeah it'd be an uphill battle so I'd be tempted to lock in some popular, transformative stuff in place like Medicare for all that can't be incrementally rolled back
Few problems there.
A: The possibility that 2020 will be a time of full blown recession that will have to be dealt with is high, which will put the brakes on most other legislation.
B: The very fact that Congress will only be held for two years kinda pre-emptively sabotages big legislation that by its very nature needs to be adjusted based on facts on the ground, especially during roll-out.
C: Supreme court is GOP so expect key provisions of whatever big legislation gets put out to be neutered, which goes back to problem B.
Not saying things shouldn't be tried, but don't be surprised when not much gets done and what does get done blows up in people's faces because the GOP will do all they can to ensure it fails.
Statehood and packing are things that really are the best solutions that can be presented to actually be able to legislate without passing rushed bills in the short spans of power that dems get while not being able to fix/adjust them. The problem is that packing will just become a tit for tat game with the GOP as they get the presidency again. But more states will slow them down on getting the Presidency again.
At the same time a packed court will be a rallying cry for their base and likely turn off independents.
Oh yeah. Like, I think a single payer system is doomed from the get-go because of it. Heck, even multi-payer is probably doomed with the current supreme court.
One of the main benefits to the M4A approach at this point is that it's harder to kill via court rulings- in particular, how do you justify that it's constitutional for people above a certain age to be covered by a single-payer system but unconstitutional for it to cover everybody? And while there are plenty of Republicans who are opposed to Medicare on principle they all know full well that it would be electoral suicide to kill it entirely.
Reapportionment Act of 1929 is what you are referring to and the very thing I and anyone who says "fix the House of Representatives" is talking about.
It needs to be repealed, the House increased and a rule set to more fairly distribute representation.
I dont think I agree with this on either single payer or multi-payer.
Fixing the House to be more fair would have an effect on the EC in that it may require less states to sign onto the national popular vote interstate. Not too sure though. I am not seeing the likelihood of getting rid of it federally as being high. That compact may be the only solution.
Defending US atrocities and imperialism...
That's..... yikes.....
I thought Americans were aware of the badness of US imperialism.
Are you seriously going to side with North Korea invading South Korea, Iraq invading Kuwait, or the Soviets invading Afghanistan?
Last edited:
I dont think that is what Kirblar or the person you quoted is talking about when they mention Afghanistan.
Nonetheless, U.S had every right to invade Afghanistan, so it's not a good example of U.S bad imperial.
User Banned (2 Days): Hostility towards other members and inflammatory generalizations
Lol, are you seriously gonna use your tactic of framing these things as having only two sides instead of, you know, critcizing and not supporting any forms of bloody imperialism?
I get it though, you're government just have the knack to maintain and continuously increase their power and influence, killing any potential dissent.
Y'all just have this raging NEED to show the world that you're the saviors™ and the heroes™ so you defend the violent meddling of other countries and continue to support the any potential avenues to again violently meddle in other countries all this despite who YOUR president is right, and then y'all turn around and act like you're "aware" and "critical" of your own country's bad doings to other countries.
Ya'll just love spreading your brand of white supremacy all over the world at the expense of other countries, lots of which are countries of brown people. All in the name of Freedom and Democracy.
God Bless America and The troops, amirite?
Ah, fair!
Hi, I am in fact also Southeast Asian, and I will just pretend that you didn't embarrass yourself with this post.
(But also 'zomg all imperialism is bad - no shit - but is also a fairyland ideal with no realistic geopolitical basis, so might as well not intervene even when Obviously Bad Shinola will go down otherwise, including clear domestic genocide' is a scalding hot take. I'm sure the citizens of Rwanda, Bosnia and Croatia appreciate your opinion.)
Fair.. I accept my embarrassment
(and just because you're Southeast Asian doesn't mean you can't be a shill for US badness and propagate white Supremacy. That shits prevalent in my country though that's to do with our history.)
Last edited:
I feel like other candidates will have to adopt Andrew Yang's platform and focus on automation breaking capitalism because it's the underlying source of most of the problems the World is facing today.
I can see Yang getting a lot of momentum when he makes his points on that debate stage.
I can see Yang getting a lot of momentum when he makes his points on that debate stage.
Actually, the US should really just close up its borders and not participate in any global affairs because all intervention of any form is always bad and imperialistic and there are no exceptions ever.
All countries should really do this.
We should probably just turn off the internet. Turn the fog of war back on.
All countries should really do this.
We should probably just turn off the internet. Turn the fog of war back on.
Everyones easily manipulated my dude. You are. I am. The poor whites with racist beliefs are. Advertising and like, all of the internet wouldnt work the way it does if everyone wasnt easily manipulated.
Dividing up the poor through racist messaging has been a cornerstone of American politics since reconstruction, im not making excuses for anyone. Its just what happened.
I've never understood the love for Biden outside of him being the VP under Obama, thus ensuring name recognition. He doesn't really seem to represent anyone.
This is why Biden wont last. Its too easy to bury him with his own terrible mistakes. Yeah, he has supported good things but so has everyone else in the race
Bernie being more vocal on these racial distinctions is a nice change.
Also, why care? People have their minds made up regardless.
Considering his town hall answers, he probably won't. He has had too many chances. Had many in 2016.
HOPEFULLY his new team with Devine et al will help him realize how important his answers to these type of questions are.
Who cares that people in general are able to be manipulated, that isnt my point. They are easily manipulated based on negative bias and bigotry with no attempt or desire to fact check. That is why they qualify as easily manipulated.
If they didn't have such a profound impact on society, I would cut them a break, but that isn't the case.
Pete Buttigieg with smooth fiery revolutionary rhetoric and a cool demeanor talking taxes and getting everyone involved to move the focus of the discussion politically within the party and nation. He's going to make a great impact on the debate stage.
I haven't seen too much of Buttigieg but I like the way he presents his arguments here. From what I've seen, I agree, I think he will make a great impact during the debates.
I suspect, based on the article, that the question she's answering isn't the question she's being asked, but not out of a deliberate intent to deceive. I think we can tale a good shot at inferring what happened in the wake of the 2011 adjustment to the policy the next administration implemented.
The policy to treat juveniles like adults was put in place when an undocumented juvenile was convicted of robbery and assault at 17 but was not reported to immigration authorities. At 21, he would go on to murder 3 people. This is a going to outrage people, and they're not wrong to be upset. It's a legitimate oversight that indirectly led to 3 people being murdered because he wasn't removed from the country.
The issue is that the fix for this was too over-broad. Newsom implemented a "treat juveniles like adults w/ reporting" policy., which Harris supported. But you don't need to game theory this very much to see where the problem's going to be. This policy is being put in place assuming that the police don't change their behavior in response to it. That is a very bad aassumption. Given the types of people attracted to police work who are overrepresented, "arresting (without requiring a conviction) an undocumented juvenile gets them reported to ICE" is going to screw up their incentives and lead to severe problems with your policing and have a negative effect on your community as a result. When Harris talks about "unintended consequences", I suspect this was the problem she's referring to, must like say, FOSTA/SESTA killing CL personals.
When Newsom's successors came into power, they adjusted the policy to remove the blanket "undocumented juvenile = report" rule and replace it with one that made reporting conditional on that juvenile being a single person w/ no family. (I assume reporting for violent crime convictions was probably implemented without a fuss.) This is a change that does two things: it removes the "report juvies= autoreport" incentive for the cops that would encourage bad actors to go out of their way to target those groups specifically, and it lines the policy up with broader immigration principles, where young single males are the groups you're least likely to admit because they're the most likely to be actively dangerous.
What an embarrassing mischaracterization of what was said to fit a narrative. He's saying he missed the days when diametrically opposed sides could actually come together to agree on legislation, not that he misses eating with white supremacists. What part about "argue like the devil with them" and "divided on issues" makes this unclear?
Enough with these stupid twitter hot takes by people who care more about stupid fucking gotchas by twisting words than accurately reporting what they've read
I'm afraid we haven't seen the worst of it. The vast majority of America isn't even engaged yet. The debate season this go around is going to be treacherous .
He has said this exact line in every speech since 2015 though...
- Status