-
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
I suspect history will mainly remember him as one of the most prominent driving forces behind the Iraq war and the pressure campaign leading up to it.
Sure, Rumsfeld deserves some criticism for having lied our country into pointlessly murdering hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, and wrecking the lives of millions more.
But to his credit, he also helped popularize standing desks!
Actually he'll be remembered as the sexiest cabinet member of 2002 by People magazine.Sure, Rumsfeld deserves some criticism for having lied our country into pointlessly murdering hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, and wrecking the lives of millions more.
But to his credit, he also helped popularize standing desks!
Also probably a war monger, but I mean who isn't from that era right?
Wow, that's horrific.
I know you're being facetious about everyone from that era being a warmonger, but I will say it is rather jarring to go back and read speeches from Al Gore or Bernie Sanders — who in 2002 were among the very few politicians really opposing the war resolution — and see how caveated their opposition was to allow for use of force against Iraq as long as it was multilaterally approved.
He sure didSure, Rumsfeld deserves some criticism for having lied our country into pointlessly murdering hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, and wrecking the lives of millions more.
But to his credit, he also helped popularize standing desks!
That's so wretched. When the climate change migrations are in full force, every one of these people will be insulated from the consequences of their opposition to climate legislation. Broken system tbh.
Of course they would focus on those 11 because those, with the exceptions of Kelly and Barrasso, are the moderates in each party and thus the most likely to potentially alter the fate of any bill. Isn't that inevitable? Why would they waste their time and money on anyone else?
Well right now the party is in control of the legislature and the presidency, and has two liberal senators from GA and AZ and beat a incumbent who got more votes than any incumbent in history...
So yes, they do know how to win elections.
Eh, Dems struggle mightly in local races. The losses in state level and local races across the country have been staggering over the last couple decades.
The fact that they squeaked out victories in two states in a historic turnout election year (huge credit to the local state parties there) doesn't erase the absolute disastrous state of the party nationally and their continual losses over the past decade.
The Democratic Party is objectively speaking one of the most electorally successful liberal parties in the world.
‘Not a healthy environment’: Kamala Harris’ office rife with dissent
There is dysfunction inside the VP’s office, aides and administration officials say. And it’s emanating from the top.
www.politico.com
I think when the forum zeroes in on critique it does a pretty great job. There was a thread a couple of weeks ago on the bullshit of meritocracy that was great. It calls out things for the sake of them being wrong. Another example, I find a lot of the comments here about Israel outrageous BUT if I look at the thing they are trying to point out , there's a good criticism there and it's better to read it and hear it than just put on the blinders.
But the forum also marinates in those critiques and entangles unrelated ones in a sort of interconnected nihilism, which requires a maximalist/extreme policy response. Those generally aren't good politics if you want to win majorities in elections and in doing so have agency over how change happens.
The other thing the forum does is treat huge swaths of the country's population as irredeemable racists, bigots, and uneducated idiots, who must be politically conquered / subjugated. The Cold Civil War is winnable, they think, Blue Texas is the new Vicksburg and General Abrams will lead a Second March to the Sea to render GOP into a rump regional party incapable of ever winning again. No, this cold civil war is not winnable, and even if it was it doesn't bring the country anywhere closer to being capable of self-governance.
‘Not a healthy environment’: Kamala Harris’ office rife with dissent
There is dysfunction inside the VP’s office, aides and administration officials say. And it’s emanating from the top.
Another hit piece on a chief of staff doing what they're supposed to. Odd.
I'm obviously talking about the modern incarnation of the party. Sure, if you include the new dealers the party's track record is impressive. They haven't really been a liberal party since the 70s, and I don't know how useful comparing them to non-fptp and parliamentary system. Or comparing "liberal" parties, ignoring what that means in the context of their country's political axes. Of course, now we're moving the goalposts and setting up an interminable quotefest because I was stupid enough to take the bait above. Just going to cut it short here. Have a nice day.
I think some parts of the media are committed to the idea that there's always some kind of palace intrigue around Harris. Holdover from the primaries. Once you get locked on with what you want to find, you then go and seek out that sweet sweet confirmation.
Democrats have won the Presidency in 3 of the last 4 elections, the House in 4 of the last 8, and held the Senate through 5 of the last 8 election cycles. In the past 15 years, federally they are definitely better than their competition at winning elections. And I understand "the Democratic Party" to generally be a federal entity, since each of the state parties are kind of their own thing. I'm not going to use state Dems' successes in VA to argue the point any more than I would expect anyone to use state Dems' failures in FL to argue against it.
Literally everyone knows how to win elections in America because it's extremely easy. Just pander to rural and suburban whites. Their views are largely homogenous and their political power is disproportionately large relative to their number. Obviously that lane is already taken and Dems are instead trying to win by stitching together a diverse coalition of voters with different, and sometimes competing, interests.
Literally everyone knows how to win elections in America because it's extremely easy. Just pander to rural and suburban whites. Their views are largely homogenous and their political power is disproportionately large relative to their number. Obviously that lane is already taken and Dems are instead trying to win by stitching together a diverse coalition of voters with different, and sometimes competing, interests.
Last edited:
There may be an actual story there around the trip to the border. But to muddy that with, like, the data person who didn't want to relocate being an example of how they can't put an office together, or that quote at the end from a "friend" (some friend, heh) that she needs her anxieties calmed and not fed. What did they really intend to report?
The Democratic Party is the most electorally successful center-left party in the OECD/First World outside of possibly Portugal & Spain. If we had a sane system, they would've held the White House consistently outside of a brief 4 year interregnum for the last 30 years, basically.
Also, the idea the Democratic Party isn't a liberal party that just shows an incredibly blinkered view of the actual American populace and the limits of our electoral system. A "liberal" party by your views would get smashed in Reagan-style landslides by even somebody like Ted Cruz.
NSA: We Have Better Things to Do Than Spy on Tucker Carlson
The agency denied the Fox Host’s claims that his show is being surveilled—an unorthodox response that speaks to both the conspiracy-addled news climate and extent of Carlson’s reach.
Assessing where they fall on the political discretion wasn't a moral judgement, but yes please continue to get riled up everyone you perceive a hidden slight on the Democratic Party.
Heavy agreement
The thing that this misses, and I think it's a very common thing in the media as well, that the Democrats are playing on Hard mode. The Republicans have significant structural advantages in most local elections, the House, the Senate, and the presidency. If the Democrats were really that bad at it, we simply wouldn't win at all.
This isn't lost on me, the deck is now ridiculously stacked against Democrats in a multitude of ways. But what is also not lost on me, is that they've spent the past 30 years maneuvering themselves into this position.
Of course the absolute trash humans in the republican party that have stacked the deck against democracy itself are to blame most directly, but they achieved this operating in a political system where the Democratic Party was the only other hegemon, i.e., not in a vacuum.
Look honestly I really am not that interested in litigating the last 30-40 years of the Democrat's history. I made a throwaway joke comment about Democrats uncanny ability to lose winnable elections, which apparently is beyond the pale for some folks here. I think we can all chill out a bit.
The point is, your inherent point in all your posts, with all the asides about "30 years" or "they're not even a liberal party" is that if the Democrat's had acted more like you act the way you want, they would've won more elections, and thus, the obvious reason, they have to win by thin margins is because they're all sellouts who don't want to do the obvious things that will win them every election, when there's zero actual evidence fort that, outside of Twitter and podcasts.
The other part is this idea that 2016 or 2020 were layup elections, that anybody could've won and since the Democrat's didn't easily win, that's proof they're bad at winning elections. If you're going to make statements about history, you might get some pushback.
Buddy I never typed any of that. You have a very strong tendency across your posts to see everything in the context of Democrats vs Bernie Bros.
Pick a fight with the NSA
Nothing bad has ever happened when you pick a fight with the NSA right
Nothing bad has ever happened when you pick a fight with the NSA right
Has anyone from the Times ever commented on this account? Because I'd love to see how they view it lol
Doesn't his background suggest he's a true believer in white supremacy, probably neo-confederacy, etc?
Is he just drinking his own brew at this point?
Grifts like this can last for decades before burning out. Alex Jones was even dumber than this and lasted a long, long time.
NSA should not have responded. Everyone knows Tucker is a lying dirtbag and his lies will spread on social media, and eventually die, only surviving in conspiracy loonybin fringes. But now they responded, bringing his lies to mainstream. It also feeds into the whole "conservatives are PeRsECuTeD" conspiracy.
This reminds me of that scene in The Dark Knight where Morgan Freeman breaks down how stupid it is to expose Bruce Wayne.
- Status