• 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.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Valkyr

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,938
GOP seems caught in a terrible position here with the infrastructure bill and that makes me happy. Passing the bi-partisan bill gives Biden a big win which Mitch simply cannot do. On the other hand, not passing it makes the reconciliation bill much larger with zero input from the GOP. And Democrats likely get everything they want in there and more. Manchin seems open to spending a decent amount from what I've seen. Not that the GOP actually cares about spending.
 

Darkstar0155

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,163
GOP seems caught in a terrible position here with the infrastructure bill and that makes me happy. Passing the bi-partisan bill gives Biden a big win which Mitch simply cannot do. On the other hand, not passing it makes the reconciliation bill much larger with zero input from the GOP. And Democrats likely get everything they want in there and more. Manchin seems open to spending a decent amount from what I've seen. Not that the GOP actually cares about spending.
GoP has absolutely screwed this up for themselves and the dems have played it pretty well. Yeah it has eaten up more time doing it this way, but big legislation almost always takes time.

Rs really have no option here and Trump and ilk staying in the spotlight is seriously going to keep hurting them.

R party has ZERO foresight or introspection and buys into their own b.s. wayyyyy to much. They could have easily played this last election better and kept the presidency, and have played the post election better if they would have just kicked trumps ass to the curb. His base would have been but hurt for a year or so but by the time another election rolled around they would all fall back in line (except the ones who only voted for to trump, and they arent coming back unless hes on the ballot again anyways)
 

Darkstar0155

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,163
Issue is, she's buying support with people who won't vote for her by spending support from people who might.
The base just about always falls in line on both sides. Who are dems/progressives going to vote for? A Republican? They will still vote for her and if she can conti use to get good support from moderates and even a sliver from moderate Republicans she easily wins again.
 

NookSports

Member
Oct 27, 2017
5,211
The base just about always falls in line on both sides. Who are dems/progressives going to vote for? A Republican? They will still vote for her and if she can conti use to get good support from moderates and even a sliver from moderate Republicans she easily wins again.
Those are "you might get primaried and lose" numbers IMO; so that's her biggest risk
 

Darkstar0155

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,163
Those are "you might get primaried and lose" numbers IMO; so that's her biggest risk
Of that i could see. It would be a risky move to primary her when she would almost surely win reelection.

And let's be honest, outside of her personality shes still a solid D vote on almost everything as long as she is ok with the process it was done with.
 

Kusagari

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,417
Bernie/Warren got almost 40% of the primary vote combined in AZ AFTER Super Tuesday. Sinema is more vulnerable than people think if a legitimate challenger emerges to primary her. Those numbers are terrible among Dems.
 

Deleted member 17092

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
20,360

Guess Sinema knows what she's doing…



Those rebublicans won't actually vote for her though.

Kelly with the overwhelming support from the base who will actually vote for him is in a safer spot than Sinema.

Also I feel like those numbers aren't really that great "for a senator" as this tweet says. I get that AZ is still very much a purple state but MN has a GOP state legislature and both of our senators poll better than that.

And yeah, she's in danger of being successfully primaried as others have said with numbers like that.

So yeah, Sinema doesn't "know what she's doing."

She is an idiot.
 

Sheepinator

Member
Jul 25, 2018
28,000
Colbert making fun of Clown at the rally.

This is the start of the bit. At 4:30 we hear Clown saying, "[we] sent a brave young man from Ohio to a plant." Yes, plant. He then goes on to ask the mystified quiet audience, "You know who I'm talking about... the stars and stripes on the face of the moon." over and over, as he clearly cannot remember Neil Armstrong's name, and he apparently meant "planet" instead of "plant", which would still be comically wrong.

www.youtube.com

No. 45 Offers Nothing New At Rambling Ohio Rally

Even some of his most fervent supporters changed the channel during the former president's speech last weekend, finding little new content amid his litany of...
 

RDreamer

Member
Oct 25, 2017
14,106



The bipartisan bill is going to fall apart quickly and Biden is smart to jump on it and tout the deal as quickly as he can even if it does so republicans are the ones backing away.
 

Deleted member 17092

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
20,360



The bipartisan bill is going to fall apart quickly and Biden is smart to jump on it and tout the deal as quickly as he can even if it does so republicans are the ones backing away.


I'm not so sure. Fricking wapo is calling it Biden's bungled infrastructure bill already.

Even though the media shouldn't blame Biden they will.
 
Oct 29, 2017
2,550

Guess Sinema knows what she's doing…


So she has way worse Dem support and a tiny bit less Independent support, but more Pub support (who won't vote for her ever). So what is she doing right? Pissing off the people who would vote for her and gaining some % of people who would NEVER vote for her? If her shtick was working her independent number's should be better than Kelly's, but they aren't.
 

Sheepinator

Member
Jul 25, 2018
28,000
Sinema and Kelly have basically the same favorable/unfavorable among independents.

Among Dems and Republicans, averaging %'s (assuming both blocks are same size):

Sinema 51.5%
Kelly 49.5%

She has a slight lead there, but only half of those are from people sure to vote for her, while over 80% of Kelly's favorables are from people sure to vote for him.
 

RDreamer

Member
Oct 25, 2017
14,106

Ummm… deploying troops for a purely political ploy financed by private unnamed donation? What the actual fuck?
 

Dr. Feel Good

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,996
Those rebublicans won't actually vote for her though.

Kelly with the overwhelming support from the base who will actually vote for him is in a safer spot than Sinema.

Also I feel like those numbers aren't really that great "for a senator" as this tweet says. I get that AZ is still very much a purple state but MN has a GOP state legislature and both of our senators poll better than that.

And yeah, she's in danger of being successfully primaried as others have said with numbers like that.

So yeah, Sinema doesn't "know what she's doing."

She is an idiot.

what is this logic? Your state legislature is gop because state legislatures are heavily influenced by districts. Your senators are democratic because they ignore boundaries through statewide elections which are easier to take when your population density is lopsided in the twin cities which are highly liberal
 

Deleted member 17092

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
20,360
what is this logic? Your state legislature is gop because state legislatures are heavily influenced by districts. Your senators are democratic because they ignore boundaries through statewide elections which are easier to take when your population density is lopsided in the twin cities which are highly liberal

MN isn't that far removed from having GOP governors and senators.

AZ now has 2 Dem senators.

I think as time goes on the state will be more reliably blue.

I'm just saying the tweet "haven't seen numbers like this for a senator" is an odd thing to say. Lots of senators poll better than that, even in swingier/purpler states than MN.
 

RDreamer

Member
Oct 25, 2017
14,106
About Sinema's approval:
Sinema has become a magnet for progressive criticism because of her refusal to scrap the filibuster, which essentially requires 60 voters in the 100-member Senate to approve most legislation. The poll shows that 46 percent of Arizona voters favor it and 36 percent are opposed.

When informed that Sinema's support for the filibuster "may mean the policy priorities of President Biden and the Democratic leadership may not have a chance of becoming law and being implemented," 50 percent said they supported her decision and 39 percent were opposed.
I'm just saying the tweet "haven't seen numbers like this for a senator" is an odd thing to say. Lots of senators poll better than that, even in swingier/purpler states than MN.
A good few do, sure. It's not quite as big an aberration as the person is putting it.

This gives a good picture:
Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) are the only 2020 presidential contenders among the 10 most popular U.S. senators, according to a Morning Consult poll.

Sanders is the most popular senator, with 62 percent approval compared with 31 percent disapproval, according to the poll, while Klobuchar is the third most popular with 58 percent approval and 26 percent disapproval.

The top five are rounded out by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) at number two, with 59 percent approval and 28 percent disapproval; Sen. Angus King (I-Maine) at 58 percent approval to 29 percent disapproval; and Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) at 56 percent approval to 26 percent disapproval.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is the senator with the highest disapproval rating, with 50 percent disapproval to 36 percent approval, and also the only one among the least popular senators with disapproval ratings of at least 50 percent. Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), who won a third term in 2018 by 11 points despite being hit with federal corruption charges in 2015, has the second-highest disapproval rating. The Justice Department dropped the charges in January 2018 after a mistrial the previous November.

Menendez and McConnell were the only senators on the least-popular list with higher disapprovals than approvals. The five least popular were rounded out by Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) with 46 percent approval and 41 percent disapproval; Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), with 49 percent approval and 40 percent disapproval; and Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), with 42 percent approval and 39 percent disapproval.

Morning Consult also found that Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.) was the senator with the greatest portion of constituents who had not heard of him, at 43 percent. The pollster surveyed 472,802 voters from Jan. 31 to March 31. Morning Consult notes that the margin of error in the results differs for each senator.
Also this:
Democratic Sen. Jon Ossoff, who just unseated former Sen. David Perdue (R) in Georgia, had an approval rating of about 50 percent, while just 40 percent of voters had an unfavorable view of him. Sen. Raphael Warnock (D), who flipped Georgia's other Senate seat in a special election and will have to run for a full term in 2022, has a net positive approval rating at 54-37.

But I do think the quote was talking about Republican approval specifically and it's hard to find that.
 
Last edited:

Sheepinator

Member
Jul 25, 2018
28,000
I agree with others in this thread that it's Trump's nomination if he wants it, and I believe he will want it because a) he wants the legal protection, b) he wants the grift, c) he by now genuinely believes his own Big Lie and wants revenge which is always a major driver for him, d) normal people can move on and be happy with being Kingmaker but this clown is so flawed he cannot, physically cannot, endorse someone else for a position he believes is his.

The wild cards are the health of both Biden and Clown in 2-3 years time. One or both may not be able to run, and if we end up with Kamala as the nominee I'm not sure America is ready to vote her in as POTUS running against a white man, especially with all the GOP vote rigging going on.
 

BoboBrazil

Attempted to circumvent a ban with an alt
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
18,765
I agree with others in this thread that it's Trump's nomination if he wants it, and I believe he will want it because a) he wants the legal protection, b) he wants the grift, c) he by now genuinely believes his own Big Lie and wants revenge which is always a major driver for him, d) normal people can move on and be happy with being Kingmaker but this clown is so flawed he cannot, physically cannot, endorse someone else for a position he believes is his.

The wild cards are the health of both Biden and Clown in 2-3 years time. One or both may not be able to run, and if we end up with Kamala as the nominee I'm not sure America is ready to vote her in as POTUS running against a white man, especially with all the GOP vote rigging going on.
Kamala 100% loses. There is no way she wins the states needed to get her the electoral votes to get elected. If Biden doesn't run everyone better hope Kamala gets primaried and loses the nomination.
 

gcubed

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,785
I agree with others in this thread that it's Trump's nomination if he wants it, and I believe he will want it because a) he wants the legal protection, b) he wants the grift, c) he by now genuinely believes his own Big Lie and wants revenge which is always a major driver for him, d) normal people can move on and be happy with being Kingmaker but this clown is so flawed he cannot, physically cannot, endorse someone else for a position he believes is his.

The wild cards are the health of both Biden and Clown in 2-3 years time. One or both may not be able to run, and if we end up with Kamala as the nominee I'm not sure America is ready to vote her in as POTUS running against a white man, especially with all the GOP vote rigging going on.
the problem is he isn't a kingmaker. Everything he touches fails. Special elections and 2022 will solidify his failure amongst the GOP as a whole... but once the GOP gets the balls to finally try to walk away, it'll be too late.

Kamala has no shot. Its either Biden or some other white man
 
Feb 14, 2018
3,083
Kelly is facing reelection in a midterm year. To win he has to turn out his base. Sinema is facing reelection in a presidential year. Her base will turn out for the top of the ticket. She may be better off being able to appeal to the middle.
 

studyguy

Member
Oct 26, 2017
11,282

Guess Sinema knows what she's doing…



Leaning on 50% GOP when Mark Kelly from exit polls only pulled in 10% of GOP seems dangerous. The 17% favorable from the GOP seems on the whole way more accurate to the actual pull Kelly has than the 50% on Sinema. Even someone as shitty as McSally pulled in nearly 49% to Kelly's 51%.
 
Oct 22, 2020
6,280
52/34 among Dems ain't exactly a super comfortable place to be in considering Sinema has to win a Dem primary.

Unless she wants to go independent, which I guess isn't a totally implausible scenario for this freak.
 

Tamanon

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
19,729
I don't think there's a Dem that stands a better chance than Kamala does, assuming Biden doesn't run.
 

GoldenFlex

Alt Account
Banned
May 7, 2021
2,900
Sharing this issue of Tangle, talking about Chauvin's sentencing and reconciling that with a progressive policing ideals.

www.readtangle.com

Derek Chauvin's sentence.

Plus, a question about the four-day work week.

My knee-jerk reaction to this story is a lust for the most severe punishment possible. Like a lot of Americans, I saw the video of George Floyd being killed and was infuriated and heartbroken. Throughout the trial, and the sentencing, I saw a convicted killer who did not seem particularly remorseful — instead, he was stoic and unflinching. And a lot of that made me want to see the judge, in this case, impose the longest sentence he could.

At the same time, throughout my adulthood, I have come to loathe our prison system. It is founded on retribution, not rehabilitation. It is built to accrue profits, not apportion justice. It is designed, explicitly, to break the backs of those who have committed crimes and return cruelty with cruelty. An eye for an eye. It is ancient, primitive and barbaric, and it is only getting better incrementally — bit by bit — thanks to the tireless work of people who recognize the gratuitousness of locking human beings in cages (and the absurdity of how much more often the United States does it than anyone else).

As a result, I've written strongly against the death penalty. I've decried mandatory minimum sentences and lengthy prison stays, which usually result in the formerly incarcerated returning to crime once they're released. I've advocated for decriminalizing all sorts of things, including drugs and sex work. I've called on my readers to extend empathy to criminals, to people whose politics you find grotesque, to politicians who have flip-flopped, to people of color enduring a non-stop barrage of news stories and videos depicting Americans who look like them being brutalized by the police. And I've been criticized by many of you for being "lefty" or a "Libertarian" or some kind of pseudo-anarchist for digging my heels in on this issue. But I don't think I'm following any political lead — I just think our prison system is broken and ineffective, and I try to lead with empathy, and continue to struggle to maintain a consistent ethical code.

And now I'm presented with Derek Chauvin. His case, in many ways, is different because he was an officer of the law — someone who was given our trust, our taxpayer dollars, a badge and a gun by the state, and then violated his oath. Crimes by cops feel worse than crimes by average citizens. I made the case for his conviction and celebrated it when it came. I believe that, by the law, he "got what he deserved." But I'd be a hypocrite not to extend the same grace, even to a murderous cop, that I so frequently call on my readers to extend to others. While working under the assumption that forgiveness is good, I'd be a hypocrite not to attempt it, even (perhaps especially) for the kind of criminal I find most loathsome.

Is 22.5 years in prison "enough?" Sure. I guess. The largest measure of considerations has been sentencing guidelines, the Floyd family and the larger societal impact on policing. But no time can fill the hole left in their hearts or repair the damage done to the country thanks to Chauvin's actions. The judge made a ruling that, given the crime committed (murder), the situation (in front of children) and the context (a cop abusing his power), the sentence should be well above the sentencing guidelines. It's an art, not a science, but I think Judge Cahill did his job admirably.

And yet, I also want to be clear: putting Chauvin in prison won't fix him. Prison won't fix him any more than it will fix a 15-year-old who got caught up in a gang and committed an armed robbery, then served 20 years in prison, because prison doesn't really fix people. Locking him in a 10x10 foot room for 23 hours a day will not change his worldview or improve his policing. It won't fix us, either — it won't usher in major policing reforms and it probably won't calm the anger we feel toward a man who has hardly shown any penance or self-reflection. At best, this sentence will send a message to other officers on the job and may even prevent some cops from using deadly force when they don't need to. But even the question of "deterrence" is an open one. Which is why the Los Angeles Times editorial board's piece — saying the sentence "need not be unremitting, lifelong vengeance" — was so refreshing to read.

The infuriating truth is that lusting for a life sentence for Chauvin is inconsistent with my own values, and my knee-jerk reaction to want to see that is a reminder that emotion can so easily override one's own moral code. Bad cops are bad, and prison is bad, but I truly don't think more bad cops serving 40 years in bad prisons is going to help solve policing or much of anything in our country. Chauvin only got what he deserved in today's context because so many others sitting in prison have gotten something they didn't deserve. But I still hope, one day, we can move toward a future that embraces something more productive than throwing people in jail to address what ails us.
 

Darkstar0155

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,163
I don't think there's a Dem that stands a better chance than Kamala does, assuming Biden doesn't run.
Lol seriously? Many dems have a better chance.
Sherrod Brown would be a instant win against trump imo.
Shit Manchin would do better than Kamala against trump.

Kamala would almost surely lose PA, MI, GA. (Ohio would ONLY be in play with like Sherrod or a Manchin)
 

Loudninja

Member
Oct 27, 2017
42,206
Lol seriously? Many dems have a better chance.
Sherrod Brown would be a instant win against trump imo.
Shit Manchin would do better than Kamala against trump.

Kamala would almost surely lose PA, MI, GA. (Ohio would ONLY be in play with like Sherrod or a Manchin)
How do they stand a better change? You already talking about what someone will lose which is nonsense.
 

JesseEwiak

Banned
Oct 31, 2017
3,781
I'll bet anybody in this thread a Trading Spaces-style dollar that not only does Sinema not get a primary challenger, but that basically every single member of the Arizona Congressional and legislative caucus endorses her as soon as she runs for re-election, including the more progressive members.
 

shadow_shogun

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,739

Jake Tapper

@jaketapper

Gosar confirms he's doing an event with white supremacist and Holocaust denier Nick Fuentes
Paul Gosar

@DrPaulGosar
Not sure why anyone is freaking out. I'll say this: there are millions of Gen Z, Y and X conservatives. They believe in America First. They will not agree 100% on every issue. No group does. We will not let the left dictate our strategy, alliances and efforts. Ignore the left https://twitter.com/gavinwax/status/1409715852958605312…
12:50 PM · Jun 29, 2021
https://twitter.com/intent/like?ref...con^s1_&ref_url=&tweet_id=1409917087385010178
 

Slash

One Winged Slayer
Banned
Sep 12, 2018
9,859
Lol seriously? Many dems have a better chance.
Sherrod Brown would be a instant win against trump imo.
Shit Manchin would do better than Kamala against trump.

Kamala would almost surely lose PA, MI, GA. (Ohio would ONLY be in play with like Sherrod or a Manchin)

Brown would be a great candidate but that's an instant R gain in the Senate if he runs. Not worth it considering how slim the majority is.
 

Deleted member 17092

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
20,360
Sharing this issue of Tangle, talking about Chauvin's sentencing and reconciling that with a progressive policing ideals.

www.readtangle.com

Derek Chauvin's sentence.

Plus, a question about the four-day work week.

Yeah, it's pretty wild seeing on era even the bloodlust so to speak for really long prison terms for all kinds of random crime threads that pop up.

Punishment as a form of justice only goes so far for the victims and their families.

22.5 year sentence is generally speaking about 1/4 to 1/3 of someone's life. It's a long sentence.

Yes, he took another man's life, but thinking he should then spend the rest of his life in prison as retribution is archaic.

I do think given Chauvin's position and the repurcussions his sentence might have on other officers' behavior makes it easy to want an even longer sentence, but that isn't how judges are supposed to handle sentencing, and frankly, they shouldn't.

There is of course also the argument that black men get as long of sentences or longer for less severe crimes than Chauvin got, that's awful, but the solution to that isn't to make everyone's sentences preposterously long, it's to make those punishments less severe and focus more on rehabilitation and community oriented restorative justice.

It's a long fight as you stated, and changing people's minds about harsh sentences in general is difficult work.

A ton of work needs to be done as well around not having a conviction for literally a single fuck up be a scarlet letter for the rest of someone's life. If they did their time and are off papers it shouldn't prevent people from finding employment or housing. All that accomplishes is higher rates of recidivism which further degrades the community.
 
Last edited:

RDreamer

Member
Oct 25, 2017
14,106
I think Kamala's getting fucked by the assignments Biden admin is giving her and she's got a bit to go but it seems ridiculous to think she's "fucked" against Trump. Absolutely not unless the economy crashes again or something. Now, against a different challenger she may have issues.
 

Darkstar0155

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,163
How do they stand a better change? You already talking about what someone will lose which is nonsense.
Well they are white men to start vs a mixed woman. While it sucks that's the case, it's the world we live in.

Anyone thinking kamala would beat trump in 2024 are delusional as long as trump has even close to the same energy he had in 2016 and 2020.

Trump got the 2nd most votes EVER. Remember that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.