• Light/Dark
  • 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.

US PoliEra 2020 |OT 2| Dershowitz says "Quid Pro Quo on the Go?" [See Staff Post]

Status
Not open for further replies.
Adder7806

Adder7806

Member
Dec 16, 2018
4,128
pigeon said:
Those people sound like racists to me and I'm relatively skeptical they would've voted for Bernie over Trump.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
They absolutely would have voted for Bernie. They went to multiple rallies. Bumper stickers. The whole nine yards. 2016 might be the only election they've ever participated in and it was because of Bernie. They're more anti-establishment idiots than blatantly racist. (Not saying they don't have racist tendencies) Really and truly these people I know (and have known forever) are just grade A gullible morons. These are Bernie or Busters. 100%. And when they couldn't get Bernie and all the DNC conspiracy shit started coming out they were determined to Bust. Privileged asshole morons who didn't care about the consequences. Part of the really fucked up things is they are half Iranian! All that shit Trump said they shrugged it off because Hillary was just the worst. Because that's what Bernie said when campaigning against her in the Primary.
 
pigeon

pigeon

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,447
Adder7806 said:
They absolutely would have voted for Bernie. They went to multiple rallies. Bumper stickers. The whole nine yards. 2016 might be the only election they've ever participated in and it was because of Bernie. They're more anti-establishment idiots than blatantly racist. (Not saying they don't have racist tendencies) Really and truly these people I know (and have known forever) are just grade A gullible morons. These are Bernie or Busters. 100%. And when they couldn't get Bernie and all the DNC conspiracy shit started coming out they were determined to Bust. Privileged asshole morons who didn't care about the consequences. Part of the really fucked up things is they are half Iranian! All that shit Trump said they shrugged it off because Hillary was just the worst. Because that's what Bernie said when campaigning against her in the Primary.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

yeah I think my analysis is correct
 
Kirblar

Kirblar

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
30,744
thepotatoman said:
Le Pen wasn't left wing on economics. Xenophobic protectionism isn't left wing because it works on the theory that some humans should have priority over others, just like neoliberal Austrian corporate globalism isn't left wing because it prioritizes the rich.

Some left parties have a right wing policy on trade and immigration, but that doesn't make it left wing.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It's left wing in terms of wanting to nationalize/redistribute stuff economically. It's right wing in that it wants to do it only for a subset of people.

Richard Nixon and Steve Bannon both also fall into this categorization. It comes up in multiparty systems in Europe a lot for a reason! (insert VSG 4-quadrant chart here)
 
IggyChooChoo

IggyChooChoo

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,230
Kirblar said:
It's left wing in terms of wanting to nationalize/redistribute stuff economically. It's right wing in that it wants to do it only for a subset of people.

Richard Nixon and Steve Bannon both also fall into this categorization. It comes up in multiparty systems in Europe a lot for a reason! (insert VSG 4-quadrant chart here)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Living in Kentucky, I am pretty convinced most nonvoting "both parties are terrible!"-types fall into this general category. Call them Whites-only socialists, supporters of Apartheid welfare, welfare chauvinists, or supporters of Herrenvolk goverment. But there are a lot out there.
 
Kirblar

Kirblar

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
30,744
IggyChooChoo said:
Living in Kentucky, I am pretty convinced most nonvoting "both parties are terrible!"-types fall into this general category. Call them Whites-only socialists, supporters of Apartheid welfare, welfare chauvinists, or supporters of Herrenvolk goverment. But there are a lot out there.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Given the data we have, you would be correct. They're put off by both parties because the GOP is the party of big business while the Dems are the party of black people. Which is why Bannon's gameplan involved Trump pretending to be an economic moderate!
 
Luminish

Luminish

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
6,508
Denver
Kirblar said:
It's left wing in terms of wanting to nationalize/redistribute stuff economically. It's right wing in that it wants to do it only for a subset of people.

Richard Nixon and Steve Bannon both also fall into this categorization. It comes up in multiparty systems in Europe a lot for a reason! (insert VSG 4-quadrant chart here)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Protectionism doesn't nationalize anything. It just benefits local businesses over global one. And Le Pen's energy and environment policy certainly wasn't about giving the government more control.

Expansion of government itself isn't right or left wing either. It depends on if it's about power to the government over other people or power of people through the means of government. Republicans increasing military spending isn't left wing.
 
Linkura

Linkura

Member
Oct 25, 2017
19,943
2lz6ha.gif
 
Linkura

Linkura

Member
Oct 25, 2017
19,943
Oh look, another great NYT hire, Ross Douthat, reposting Coronavirus conspiracies on Twitter. Michael Barbaro also retweeted it. The best hires.
 
Luminish

Luminish

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
6,508
Denver


Love that headline. "Bernie Sanders leads Donald Trump in polls, even when you remind people he's a socialist"
 
Last edited:
SSF1991

SSF1991

Member
Jun 19, 2018
3,263

The Democratic National Committee announced new rules for getting on stage for the party's Feb. 19 debate in Nevada — and they have the potential to shake up who is on the stage.

The new qualification standards scrap the grassroots funding support threshold that candidates have had to meet for prior debates. That means former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, a billionaire who is self-funding his campaign and is not soliciting donations, could make his first appearance on stage.

The DNC said Friday that candidates have three paths to the Nevada debate stage. They could reach 10% support in a combination of four national polls or state polls from Nevada or South Carolina; 12% support in two polls from Nevada or South Carolina or both; or get a convention delegate in Iowa and New Hampshire, which hold their respective caucus and primary earlier in February.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

So good news: poll critera is up to 10%.
Bad news: Even then, I could somehow see more candidates than the last debate because grassroots funding support got removed as a critera, meaning fucking Bloomberg could get in.
 
Kirblar

Kirblar

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
30,744
thepotatoman said:
Protectionism doesn't nationalize anything. It just benefits local businesses over global one. And Le Pen's energy and environment policy certainly wasn't about giving the government more control.

Expansion of government itself isn't right or left wing either. It depends on if it's about power to the government over other people or power of people through the means of government. Republicans increasing military spending isn't left wing.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The people I'm describing are very much not just "protectionists" - Richard Nixon's ideal economics were massively far to the left of Ronald Reagan, he was all for expansion of the state and such, he just wanted the rewards to accrue to white people.

Protectionism is actually a social issue disguised as an economic one, which is why I give protectionists on the "left" a glare when it pops up, just like with NIMBY crap. That's absolutely not why I am saying people like Bannon or Nixon are economically left of center.
 
adam387

adam387

Member
Nov 27, 2017
5,215
I'm pretty sure it's the billionaire part that does the heavy lifting more so than the socialist part.
 
Arm Van Dam

Arm Van Dam

self-requested ban
Banned
Mar 30, 2019
5,951
Illinois
GA-07 candidates Bourdeaux ($310k Q4, $860k COH) and Karinshak ($160k raised plus $150k of her own = $310k Q4, $420k COH) outraised their GOP counterparts Unterman ($76k Q4, $765k COH), Homrich ($111k Q4, 398k COH), and Gonsalves ($120k Q4, $160k COH).
 
Tfritz

Tfritz

Member
Oct 25, 2017
13,314
RastaMentality said:
I'm surprised how little talk there's been about Bernie putting a moratorium on deportations until an audit is complete. Which would likely take a year+!
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

you'd think there'd be a whole lot more talk about the atrocities of the american immigration system, period, but i guess a lot of folks think it's more important to have the candidates reiterate their slightly different positions re: universal healthcare instead of discussing their plans to right the wrongs of our immigration system or even presenting a united front of "locking kids in cages in bad, actually"
 
Luminish

Luminish

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
6,508
Denver
Kirblar said:
The people I'm describing are very much not just "protectionists" - Richard Nixon's ideal economics were massively far to the left of Ronald Reagan, he was all for expansion of the state and such, he just wanted the rewards to accrue to white people.

Protectionism is actually a social issue disguised as an economic one, which is why I give protectionists on the "left" a glare when it pops up, just like with NIMBY crap. That's absolutely not why I am saying people like Bannon or Nixon are economically left of center.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
NIMBY/YIMBY is another good example of not being left or right. Denying a homeless shelter because rich people don't like being near them and allowing some business try to make money by tearing down a parking lot people need to be able to own a car are both examples of right wing policy benefiting the more well off and less needy people.

The point isn't that everyone will adopt every policy on one side of the axis. But if there is any gravity for policies to fall on one side or the other, it's on the lines of equality verses hierarchy, not on bureaucracy verses free markets
 
RastaMentality

RastaMentality

Member
Oct 25, 2017
13,144
Tfritz said:
you'd think there'd be a whole lot more talk about the atrocities of the american immigration system, period, but i guess a lot of folks think it's more important to have the candidates reiterate their slightly different positions re: universal healthcare instead of discussing their plans to right the wrongs of our immigration system or even presenting a united front of "locking kids in cages in bad, actually"
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The Dem party was fairly bog standard on immigration going into this primary. It was a whole bunch of vague "immigration reform!" "path to citizenship!" promises without an actual outline. Trump galvanizing his base on anti immigration probably scared off moderate dems from mentioning anything more than "roll back the cages" which fucking sucks.
 
pigeon

pigeon

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,447
Tfritz said:
you'd think there'd be a whole lot more talk about the atrocities of the american immigration system, period, but i guess a lot of folks think it's more important to have the candidates reiterate their slightly different positions re: universal healthcare instead of discussing their plans to right the wrongs of our immigration system or even presenting a united front of "locking kids in cages in bad, actually"
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

people are afraid saying cages are bad will lose them votes which pretty much sums things up
 
Ogodei

Ogodei

One Winged Slayer
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
10,256
Coruscant
RastaMentality said:
The Dem party was fairly bog standard on immigration going into this primary. It was a whole bunch of vague "immigration reform!" "path to citizenship!" promises without an actual outline. Trump galvanizing his base on anti immigration probably scared off moderate dems from mentioning anything more than "roll back the cages" which fucking sucks.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The issue is that a truly forward-thinking immigration policy is still very unpopular. Americans may disapprove of Trump's immigration policy but still will buy the rhetoric of undocumented immigrants as "line-jumpers," etc.
 
Y2Kev

Y2Kev

Member
Oct 25, 2017
13,868
I don't even think we could grease murk's palms if we got to 49 seats. She sucks too much.
 

viskod

Member
Nov 9, 2017
4,396
thepotatoman said:


Love that headline. "Bernie Sanders leads Donald Trump in polls, even when you remind people he's a socialist"
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


eh... I don't know. When this is your question.

"If the 2020 U.S. Presidential election was held today, who would you vote for if the candidates were Democrat Bernie Sanders, who wants to tax the billionaire class to help the working class and Republican Donald Trump, who says Sanders is a socialist who supports a government takeover of healthcare and open borders?"

That's not identifying Sanders as a socialist that's just saying Donald Trump accuses him of being a Socialist.

Seem rather disingenuous and designed to get the take they want.
 
Ernest

Ernest

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,507
So.Cal.
Goddamn! I hope the political pendulum swings so hard to the Left, that all these fucking Senators end up eating all the shit coming their way for gaming our system to their will like this.
 
Kaitos

Kaitos

Tens across the board!
Moderator
Oct 25, 2017
14,709
Arm Van Dam said:
GA-07 candidates Bourdeaux ($310k Q4, $860k COH) and Karinshak ($160k raised plus $150k of her own = $310k Q4, $420k COH) outraised their GOP counterparts Unterman ($76k Q4, $765k COH), Homrich ($111k Q4, 398k COH), and Gonsalves ($120k Q4, $160k COH).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Unterman is such a piece of shit. If she wins I'd be furious.
 
Effect

Effect

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,945
RastaMentality said:

Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

You can't say he doesn't treat his people well. I'm not going to lie. If Bloomberg won I wouldn't have an issue with it. I could see him winning. For all his negatives around stop and frisk, running NYC is no small feat. Make sure he has people around him so that shit doesn't happen again then I'm good. I can't say he would be a bad President. Like I could be comfortable with him in the job. Honestly I don't really care about the whole millionaire/billionaire issue as long as they're doing the right thing. If he can self-fund, get the numbers, maybe win this then so be it. I think it's beyond stupid to disarm yourself or to simply rely on "grass roots" which is largely just code for "well off white liberals" in the end. Those that really need help aren't sitting there with the extra cash to spare to be donating week after week.

I'm of the belief you get the money where you can to run your campaign and get your voice out there. I don't care how you do it. The stupidest thing the DNC did and others for allowing was the funding thresh hold. Trying to make a group of people happy that are only ever interested in one person and putting everyone else at a disadvantage. It's why I never got mad at Pete for where his funding was coming from. Why I was supper annoyed at Harris for not doing more of the fundraisers. Take the money and run and fuck anyone that tries to demonize it.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.