|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On March 08 2016 08:47 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2016 08:43 oneofthem wrote:On March 08 2016 08:18 Souma wrote:On March 08 2016 08:11 oneofthem wrote:
how do sandernistas reconcile hillary's demonic presence to the gop with her alleged corruption. are republicans sincere crusaders of integrity? What kind of stupid question is this? Just because one entity is bad it has to make the other good? No, they're all crap. for real though why do you think the gop hate her The statement is simply utterly irrational. Just because two people are corrupt does not mean they are on the same side. If i am bought by the beef lobby, and you are bought by the tofu lobby, despite the fact that we are both bought we are still very much opposed and will champion very different agendas, and thus try to make the other look bad.
answer is hillary is powerful and in control of a political machine best equipped to challenge republican organization. corruption does not drive hate but rather policy difference and threat level.
it is also ignorant to equate lobbying with corruption
|
On March 08 2016 08:53 oneofthem wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2016 08:47 Simberto wrote:On March 08 2016 08:43 oneofthem wrote:On March 08 2016 08:18 Souma wrote:On March 08 2016 08:11 oneofthem wrote:
how do sandernistas reconcile hillary's demonic presence to the gop with her alleged corruption. are republicans sincere crusaders of integrity? What kind of stupid question is this? Just because one entity is bad it has to make the other good? No, they're all crap. for real though why do you think the gop hate her The statement is simply utterly irrational. Just because two people are corrupt does not mean they are on the same side. If i am bought by the beef lobby, and you are bought by the tofu lobby, despite the fact that we are both bought we are still very much opposed and will champion very different agendas, and thus try to make the other look bad. answer is hillary is powerful and in control of a political machine best equipped to challenge republican organization. corruption does not drive hate but rather policy difference and threat level. it is also ignorant to equate lobbying with corruption
Given that half of the US is somehow convinced that climate change does not exist or don't see it as a serious issue you're actually going to tell me that there is anything more than a meaningless semantic difference between lobbying and corruption and that it's all experts bringing the knowledge in?
|
On March 08 2016 09:00 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2016 08:53 oneofthem wrote:On March 08 2016 08:47 Simberto wrote:On March 08 2016 08:43 oneofthem wrote:On March 08 2016 08:18 Souma wrote:On March 08 2016 08:11 oneofthem wrote:
how do sandernistas reconcile hillary's demonic presence to the gop with her alleged corruption. are republicans sincere crusaders of integrity? What kind of stupid question is this? Just because one entity is bad it has to make the other good? No, they're all crap. for real though why do you think the gop hate her The statement is simply utterly irrational. Just because two people are corrupt does not mean they are on the same side. If i am bought by the beef lobby, and you are bought by the tofu lobby, despite the fact that we are both bought we are still very much opposed and will champion very different agendas, and thus try to make the other look bad. answer is hillary is powerful and in control of a political machine best equipped to challenge republican organization. corruption does not drive hate but rather policy difference and threat level. it is also ignorant to equate lobbying with corruption Given that half of the US is somehow convinced that climate change does not exist or don't see it as a serious issue you're actually going to tell me that there is anything more than a meaningless semantic difference between lobbying and corruption?
I forgot about that. This election has been so wild that it's easy to lose track of the fact that a large segment of our population doesn't believe in climate change or evolution. Man. That is so fucked up.
|
On March 08 2016 09:00 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2016 08:53 oneofthem wrote:On March 08 2016 08:47 Simberto wrote:On March 08 2016 08:43 oneofthem wrote:On March 08 2016 08:18 Souma wrote:On March 08 2016 08:11 oneofthem wrote:
how do sandernistas reconcile hillary's demonic presence to the gop with her alleged corruption. are republicans sincere crusaders of integrity? What kind of stupid question is this? Just because one entity is bad it has to make the other good? No, they're all crap. for real though why do you think the gop hate her The statement is simply utterly irrational. Just because two people are corrupt does not mean they are on the same side. If i am bought by the beef lobby, and you are bought by the tofu lobby, despite the fact that we are both bought we are still very much opposed and will champion very different agendas, and thus try to make the other look bad. answer is hillary is powerful and in control of a political machine best equipped to challenge republican organization. corruption does not drive hate but rather policy difference and threat level. it is also ignorant to equate lobbying with corruption Given that half of the US is somehow convinced that climate change does not exist or don't see it as a serious issue you're actually going to tell me that there is anything more than a meaningless semantic difference between lobbying and corruption?
Teachers and their corrupt lobbying.
Nurses and their corrupt lobbying.
Pro Choice groups and their corrupt lobbying.
Planned Parenthood and their corrupt lobbying.
Unions and their corrupt lobbying.
ANYONE can lobby and the only thing making them corrupt is whether or not you disagree with what they are fighting for.
|
By the way, Hillary killed that town hall. Clear, specific and detailed answers.
|
A nice column about the "Sanders or I don't vote" attitude some people have:
Bernie Sanders or bust? That's a stance based on privilege
Yes, affluent, mostly white progressives survived the last Republican regime, but those who literally cannot afford to act as piously as y’all suffered. I have critiqued the Obama administration, but to act as though he has not been an agent of change – and that Hillary Clinton wouldn’t do more good than Donald Trump – is to dance with delusion. Had many of these voters supported the Democrats in the non-presidential election years, Obama would’ve been able to promote an even more progressive agenda.
People who refuse to vote for a less-favored Democrat on principle are just punishing a second constituency unlikely to vote: those who know very little about the power they yield because they are so marginalized they feel their say doesn’t matter.
Cling to your self-righteousness all you want, but be very clear that only some people can afford this kind of sacrifice. I’m not saying fall in line with Hillary Clinton (or Bernie Sanders, should a miracle happen), but there are other ways to express your disapproval besides sitting out the vote altogether.
Source
|
On March 08 2016 09:02 Naracs_Duc wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2016 09:00 Nyxisto wrote:On March 08 2016 08:53 oneofthem wrote:On March 08 2016 08:47 Simberto wrote:On March 08 2016 08:43 oneofthem wrote:On March 08 2016 08:18 Souma wrote:On March 08 2016 08:11 oneofthem wrote:
how do sandernistas reconcile hillary's demonic presence to the gop with her alleged corruption. are republicans sincere crusaders of integrity? What kind of stupid question is this? Just because one entity is bad it has to make the other good? No, they're all crap. for real though why do you think the gop hate her The statement is simply utterly irrational. Just because two people are corrupt does not mean they are on the same side. If i am bought by the beef lobby, and you are bought by the tofu lobby, despite the fact that we are both bought we are still very much opposed and will champion very different agendas, and thus try to make the other look bad. answer is hillary is powerful and in control of a political machine best equipped to challenge republican organization. corruption does not drive hate but rather policy difference and threat level. it is also ignorant to equate lobbying with corruption Given that half of the US is somehow convinced that climate change does not exist or don't see it as a serious issue you're actually going to tell me that there is anything more than a meaningless semantic difference between lobbying and corruption? Teachers and their corrupt lobbying. Nurses and their corrupt lobbying. Pro Choice groups and their corrupt lobbying. Planned Parenthood and their corrupt lobbying. Unions and their corrupt lobbying. ANYONE can lobby and the only thing making them corrupt is whether or not you disagree with what they are fighting for.
No, I think what makes them corrupt is whether they're using large amounts of money to circumvent the democratic process. Nurses teachers and women have powerful organisations because there are a lot of them. They aren't filthy rich and they most of the time don't have powerful political allies or large shady donors. It's just people representing their interests as it should be in a democratic system. When one corporation or family can match this simply because of the size of their wallet you have a problem.
|
On March 08 2016 08:05 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2016 08:02 Ghostcom wrote:On March 08 2016 07:58 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On March 08 2016 07:51 Plansix wrote:On March 08 2016 07:50 Simberto wrote:On March 08 2016 07:02 ticklishmusic wrote:On March 08 2016 06:45 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 08 2016 00:52 Plansix wrote:
I have so many friends from Canada and the EU that can’t understand why the US system is so terrible and people put up with it. Then I have to explain to them that the health insurance lobby has a lot of influence over government and donates heavily. Then they ask why we put up with that too.
By the end it, it degrades down to the fact that we are terrified of government, so we will let anyone else screw us over so long as we don’t vote for them.
Is that when you tell them you're supporting the candidate that's been paid a millions of dollars by that health insurance lobby instead of the one who isn't and is for universal healthcare? Lobbying is kind of a fundamental right and whatnot. Why exactly is bribing officials a fundamental right? Well regulated lobbying is part of the political process. We lack "well regulated' part and could do more. But lobbying it something all groups do. 1) Corporate lobbying IS NOT a fundamental right. 2) Regulated lobbying American style is part of the political process only in USA 3) An action being involved in a political process does not make it a right in any case. I have never laughed heartier than at bullet nr 2. Lobbying is ALWAYS going to take place in ANY political system. You can either embrace it and regulate it in a way so that it is transparent or you can try and outlaw it in which case it is just going to happen in the hidden. It is not going to go away though. Don't you have the opposite stance when it comes to the drug war?
No. Not even close - and you would know it if you actually ever read what other posters in this thread wrote instead of strawmanning them.
On March 08 2016 08:05 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2016 08:02 Ghostcom wrote:On March 08 2016 07:58 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On March 08 2016 07:51 Plansix wrote:On March 08 2016 07:50 Simberto wrote:On March 08 2016 07:02 ticklishmusic wrote:On March 08 2016 06:45 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 08 2016 00:52 Plansix wrote:
I have so many friends from Canada and the EU that can’t understand why the US system is so terrible and people put up with it. Then I have to explain to them that the health insurance lobby has a lot of influence over government and donates heavily. Then they ask why we put up with that too.
By the end it, it degrades down to the fact that we are terrified of government, so we will let anyone else screw us over so long as we don’t vote for them.
Is that when you tell them you're supporting the candidate that's been paid a millions of dollars by that health insurance lobby instead of the one who isn't and is for universal healthcare? Lobbying is kind of a fundamental right and whatnot. Why exactly is bribing officials a fundamental right? Well regulated lobbying is part of the political process. We lack "well regulated' part and could do more. But lobbying it something all groups do. 1) Corporate lobbying IS NOT a fundamental right. 2) Regulated lobbying American style is part of the political process only in USA 3) An action being involved in a political process does not make it a right in any case. I have never laughed heartier than at bullet nr 2. Lobbying is ALWAYS going to take place in ANY political system. You can either embrace it and regulate it in a way so that it is transparent or you can try and outlaw it in which case it is just going to happen in the shadows. It is not going to go away though. Are you telling me that the Socialist Utopia of Denmark as not destroyed all lobbying? I thought it was the perfect land?
Nah, I'm sorry to burst the BernieBubble, but I'm afraid Denmark isn't all that perfect (though you got it right - still better than Sweden  ). We are a lot more open about where stuff like our donations come from though (and every year this is a push for more transparency). We also have a tradition for doing 3-part negotiations where the government, the workers and the business together agree on how to move forward (and thus you remove some of the lobbying by it being taken care of in a more honest deal between the people with vested interests)
|
On March 08 2016 09:09 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2016 09:02 Naracs_Duc wrote:On March 08 2016 09:00 Nyxisto wrote:On March 08 2016 08:53 oneofthem wrote:On March 08 2016 08:47 Simberto wrote:On March 08 2016 08:43 oneofthem wrote:On March 08 2016 08:18 Souma wrote:On March 08 2016 08:11 oneofthem wrote:
how do sandernistas reconcile hillary's demonic presence to the gop with her alleged corruption. are republicans sincere crusaders of integrity? What kind of stupid question is this? Just because one entity is bad it has to make the other good? No, they're all crap. for real though why do you think the gop hate her The statement is simply utterly irrational. Just because two people are corrupt does not mean they are on the same side. If i am bought by the beef lobby, and you are bought by the tofu lobby, despite the fact that we are both bought we are still very much opposed and will champion very different agendas, and thus try to make the other look bad. answer is hillary is powerful and in control of a political machine best equipped to challenge republican organization. corruption does not drive hate but rather policy difference and threat level. it is also ignorant to equate lobbying with corruption Given that half of the US is somehow convinced that climate change does not exist or don't see it as a serious issue you're actually going to tell me that there is anything more than a meaningless semantic difference between lobbying and corruption? Teachers and their corrupt lobbying. Nurses and their corrupt lobbying. Pro Choice groups and their corrupt lobbying. Planned Parenthood and their corrupt lobbying. Unions and their corrupt lobbying. ANYONE can lobby and the only thing making them corrupt is whether or not you disagree with what they are fighting for. No, I think what makes them corrupt is whether they're using large amounts of money to circumvent the democratic process. Nurses teachers and women have powerful organisations because there are a lot of them. They aren't filthy rich and they most of the time don't have powerful political allies or large shady donors. It's just people representing their interests as it should be in a democratic system. When one corporation or family can match this simply because of the size of their wallet you have a problem.
Just because you agree with a lobbyist does not make that lobbyist no longer corrupt. And just because you disagree with a lobbyist does not mean that lobbyist is corrupt.
Do you know how change is done? With money. Do you know how rights are protected and laws enforced? With money. Just because there are people who have different views than you does not make them corrupt nor does it make you innocent.
|
|
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On March 08 2016 09:00 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2016 08:53 oneofthem wrote:On March 08 2016 08:47 Simberto wrote:On March 08 2016 08:43 oneofthem wrote:On March 08 2016 08:18 Souma wrote:On March 08 2016 08:11 oneofthem wrote:
how do sandernistas reconcile hillary's demonic presence to the gop with her alleged corruption. are republicans sincere crusaders of integrity? What kind of stupid question is this? Just because one entity is bad it has to make the other good? No, they're all crap. for real though why do you think the gop hate her The statement is simply utterly irrational. Just because two people are corrupt does not mean they are on the same side. If i am bought by the beef lobby, and you are bought by the tofu lobby, despite the fact that we are both bought we are still very much opposed and will champion very different agendas, and thus try to make the other look bad. answer is hillary is powerful and in control of a political machine best equipped to challenge republican organization. corruption does not drive hate but rather policy difference and threat level. it is also ignorant to equate lobbying with corruption Given that half of the US is somehow convinced that climate change does not exist or don't see it as a serious issue you're actually going to tell me that there is anything more than a meaningless semantic difference between lobbying and corruption and that it's all experts bringing the knowledge in?
lol but that isn't even an example of lobbying.
|
On March 08 2016 09:09 kwizach wrote:A nice column about the "Sanders or I don't vote" attitude some people have: Show nested quote +Bernie Sanders or bust? That's a stance based on privilege
Yes, affluent, mostly white progressives survived the last Republican regime, but those who literally cannot afford to act as piously as y’all suffered. I have critiqued the Obama administration, but to act as though he has not been an agent of change – and that Hillary Clinton wouldn’t do more good than Donald Trump – is to dance with delusion. Had many of these voters supported the Democrats in the non-presidential election years, Obama would’ve been able to promote an even more progressive agenda.
People who refuse to vote for a less-favored Democrat on principle are just punishing a second constituency unlikely to vote: those who know very little about the power they yield because they are so marginalized they feel their say doesn’t matter.
Cling to your self-righteousness all you want, but be very clear that only some people can afford this kind of sacrifice. I’m not saying fall in line with Hillary Clinton (or Bernie Sanders, should a miracle happen), but there are other ways to express your disapproval besides sitting out the vote altogether. Source
Very interesting perspective. Poor minority communities would suffer immensely under a GOP presidency. While they may not do as well under Clinton as they would under Bernie (A point I would say is wrong), when people doing so poorly, every bit counts. This is especially true for blacks and hispanics. The difference between Clinton and the GOP may be the difference between having food on the table or not as a result of food stamps or unemployment or any of the other issues at stake.
|
On March 08 2016 09:16 Naracs_Duc wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2016 09:09 Nyxisto wrote:On March 08 2016 09:02 Naracs_Duc wrote:On March 08 2016 09:00 Nyxisto wrote:On March 08 2016 08:53 oneofthem wrote:On March 08 2016 08:47 Simberto wrote:On March 08 2016 08:43 oneofthem wrote:On March 08 2016 08:18 Souma wrote:On March 08 2016 08:11 oneofthem wrote:
how do sandernistas reconcile hillary's demonic presence to the gop with her alleged corruption. are republicans sincere crusaders of integrity? What kind of stupid question is this? Just because one entity is bad it has to make the other good? No, they're all crap. for real though why do you think the gop hate her The statement is simply utterly irrational. Just because two people are corrupt does not mean they are on the same side. If i am bought by the beef lobby, and you are bought by the tofu lobby, despite the fact that we are both bought we are still very much opposed and will champion very different agendas, and thus try to make the other look bad. answer is hillary is powerful and in control of a political machine best equipped to challenge republican organization. corruption does not drive hate but rather policy difference and threat level. it is also ignorant to equate lobbying with corruption Given that half of the US is somehow convinced that climate change does not exist or don't see it as a serious issue you're actually going to tell me that there is anything more than a meaningless semantic difference between lobbying and corruption? Teachers and their corrupt lobbying. Nurses and their corrupt lobbying. Pro Choice groups and their corrupt lobbying. Planned Parenthood and their corrupt lobbying. Unions and their corrupt lobbying. ANYONE can lobby and the only thing making them corrupt is whether or not you disagree with what they are fighting for. No, I think what makes them corrupt is whether they're using large amounts of money to circumvent the democratic process. Nurses teachers and women have powerful organisations because there are a lot of them. They aren't filthy rich and they most of the time don't have powerful political allies or large shady donors. It's just people representing their interests as it should be in a democratic system. When one corporation or family can match this simply because of the size of their wallet you have a problem. Just because you agree with a lobbyist does not make that lobbyist no longer corrupt. And just because you disagree with a lobbyist does not mean that lobbyist is corrupt. Do you know how change is done? With money. Do you know how rights are protected and laws enforced? With money. Just because there are people who have different views than you does not make them corrupt nor does it make you innocent.
this doesn't even address what I am saying. And if it is true that money is the sole facilitator of political change you are just confirming my point
On March 08 2016 09:17 oneofthem wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2016 09:00 Nyxisto wrote:On March 08 2016 08:53 oneofthem wrote:On March 08 2016 08:47 Simberto wrote:On March 08 2016 08:43 oneofthem wrote:On March 08 2016 08:18 Souma wrote:On March 08 2016 08:11 oneofthem wrote:
how do sandernistas reconcile hillary's demonic presence to the gop with her alleged corruption. are republicans sincere crusaders of integrity? What kind of stupid question is this? Just because one entity is bad it has to make the other good? No, they're all crap. for real though why do you think the gop hate her The statement is simply utterly irrational. Just because two people are corrupt does not mean they are on the same side. If i am bought by the beef lobby, and you are bought by the tofu lobby, despite the fact that we are both bought we are still very much opposed and will champion very different agendas, and thus try to make the other look bad. answer is hillary is powerful and in control of a political machine best equipped to challenge republican organization. corruption does not drive hate but rather policy difference and threat level. it is also ignorant to equate lobbying with corruption Given that half of the US is somehow convinced that climate change does not exist or don't see it as a serious issue you're actually going to tell me that there is anything more than a meaningless semantic difference between lobbying and corruption and that it's all experts bringing the knowledge in? lol but that isn't even an example of lobbying.
how the fuck is conservative think tanks throwing tons of money at the political process and the media to influence policy making not lobbying?
On March 08 2016 09:15 Ghostcom wrote:
We also have a tradition for doing 3-part negotiations where the government, the workers and the business together agree on how to move forward (and thus you remove some of the lobbying by it being taken care of in a more honest deal between the people with vested interests)
so Danish politics really is like Borgen?
|
Does anyone have that article about money spent vs influence exerted by interest groups? I seem to recall one being linked recently which I never got around to read.
EDIT: Never actually watched "Borgen", but it received accolades for its accuracy (although somewhat hyperbolic at points and it usually only had 60 minutes to tackle even complex issues) so I believe that it portrays the political life pretty well. The multiparty negotiations with (somewhat) shifting alliances is a constant and ongoing thing. The 3-party negotiation which the interested parties is pretty much a stable - they are actually currently ongoing.
|
On March 08 2016 09:20 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2016 09:16 Naracs_Duc wrote:On March 08 2016 09:09 Nyxisto wrote:On March 08 2016 09:02 Naracs_Duc wrote:On March 08 2016 09:00 Nyxisto wrote:On March 08 2016 08:53 oneofthem wrote:On March 08 2016 08:47 Simberto wrote:On March 08 2016 08:43 oneofthem wrote:On March 08 2016 08:18 Souma wrote:On March 08 2016 08:11 oneofthem wrote:
how do sandernistas reconcile hillary's demonic presence to the gop with her alleged corruption. are republicans sincere crusaders of integrity? What kind of stupid question is this? Just because one entity is bad it has to make the other good? No, they're all crap. for real though why do you think the gop hate her The statement is simply utterly irrational. Just because two people are corrupt does not mean they are on the same side. If i am bought by the beef lobby, and you are bought by the tofu lobby, despite the fact that we are both bought we are still very much opposed and will champion very different agendas, and thus try to make the other look bad. answer is hillary is powerful and in control of a political machine best equipped to challenge republican organization. corruption does not drive hate but rather policy difference and threat level. it is also ignorant to equate lobbying with corruption Given that half of the US is somehow convinced that climate change does not exist or don't see it as a serious issue you're actually going to tell me that there is anything more than a meaningless semantic difference between lobbying and corruption? Teachers and their corrupt lobbying. Nurses and their corrupt lobbying. Pro Choice groups and their corrupt lobbying. Planned Parenthood and their corrupt lobbying. Unions and their corrupt lobbying. ANYONE can lobby and the only thing making them corrupt is whether or not you disagree with what they are fighting for. No, I think what makes them corrupt is whether they're using large amounts of money to circumvent the democratic process. Nurses teachers and women have powerful organisations because there are a lot of them. They aren't filthy rich and they most of the time don't have powerful political allies or large shady donors. It's just people representing their interests as it should be in a democratic system. When one corporation or family can match this simply because of the size of their wallet you have a problem. Just because you agree with a lobbyist does not make that lobbyist no longer corrupt. And just because you disagree with a lobbyist does not mean that lobbyist is corrupt. Do you know how change is done? With money. Do you know how rights are protected and laws enforced? With money. Just because there are people who have different views than you does not make them corrupt nor does it make you innocent. this doesn't even address what I am saying. And if it is true that money is the sole facilitator of political change you are just confirming my point Show nested quote +On March 08 2016 09:17 oneofthem wrote:On March 08 2016 09:00 Nyxisto wrote:On March 08 2016 08:53 oneofthem wrote:On March 08 2016 08:47 Simberto wrote:On March 08 2016 08:43 oneofthem wrote:On March 08 2016 08:18 Souma wrote:On March 08 2016 08:11 oneofthem wrote:
how do sandernistas reconcile hillary's demonic presence to the gop with her alleged corruption. are republicans sincere crusaders of integrity? What kind of stupid question is this? Just because one entity is bad it has to make the other good? No, they're all crap. for real though why do you think the gop hate her The statement is simply utterly irrational. Just because two people are corrupt does not mean they are on the same side. If i am bought by the beef lobby, and you are bought by the tofu lobby, despite the fact that we are both bought we are still very much opposed and will champion very different agendas, and thus try to make the other look bad. answer is hillary is powerful and in control of a political machine best equipped to challenge republican organization. corruption does not drive hate but rather policy difference and threat level. it is also ignorant to equate lobbying with corruption Given that half of the US is somehow convinced that climate change does not exist or don't see it as a serious issue you're actually going to tell me that there is anything more than a meaningless semantic difference between lobbying and corruption and that it's all experts bringing the knowledge in? lol but that isn't even an example of lobbying. how the fuck is conservative think tanks throwing tons of money at the political process and the media to influence policy making not lobbying? Show nested quote +On March 08 2016 09:15 Ghostcom wrote:
We also have a tradition for doing 3-part negotiations where the government, the workers and the business together agree on how to move forward (and thus you remove some of the lobbying by it being taken care of in a more honest deal between the people with vested interests) so Danish politics really is like Borgen?
a.) Money is not the sole factor to enact change. But try telling teachers that they should teach for free and see how far no money gets you. See how much effort the oversight groups spend preventing fraud/malpractice/civil rights violations without funding. Heck, imagine how long roads last without funding. Is money the only thing? Of course not. But you ever try removing it from the equation?
You know what would fix education? More money.
You know what would fix our crumbling infrastructure? More money.
You know how to prevent republicans from winning senate and congress seats in order to allow people like Bernie to push their pipe dreams forward? More money.
I know that you're biased, but don't be stupid.
Conservative think tanks exists because it is possible that people see the world differently than you. Silencing dissenters very quickly leads to oppressive regimes. A sign of a good democracy is that people like GOP think tanks are even allowed to talk in the first place.
You don't have to agree with them. Heck, you're not even listening to them if you think that's their goal.
|
Wow...
Billionaires, tech CEOs and top members of the Republican establishment flew to a private island resort off the coast of Georgia this weekend for the American Enterprise Institute's annual World Forum, according to sources familiar with the secretive gathering.
The main topic at the closed-to-the-press confab? How to stop Republican front-runner Donald Trump.
Apple CEO Tim Cook, Google co-founder Larry Page, Napster creator and Facebook investor Sean Parker, and Tesla Motors and SpaceX honcho Elon Musk all attended. So did Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), political guru Karl Rove, House Speaker Paul Ryan, GOP Sens. Tom Cotton (Ark.), Cory Gardner (Colo.), Tim Scott (S.C.), Rob Portman (Ohio) and Ben Sasse (Neb.), who recently made news by saying he "cannot support Donald Trump."
Along with Ryan, the House was represented by Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Fred Upton (Mich.), Rep. Kevin Brady (Texas) and almost-Speaker Kevin McCarthy (Calif.), sources said, along with leadership figure Cathy McMorris Rodgers (Wash.), Budget Committee Chairman Tom Price (R-Ga.), Financial Services Committee Chairman Jeb Hensarling (Texas) and Diane Black (Tenn.).
Philip Anschutz, the billionaire GOP donor whose company owns a stake in Sea Island, was also there, along with Democratic Rep. John Delaney, who represents Maryland. Arthur Sulzberger, the publisher of The New York Times, was there, too, a Times spokeswoman confirmed. A Politico spokesman refused to say whether publisher Robert Allbritton attended. Allbritton was on a list of people scheduled to attend last year's conference.
"A specter was haunting the World Forum--the specter of Donald Trump," Kristol wrote in an emailed report from the conference, borrowing the opening lines of the Communist Manifesto. "There was much unhappiness about his emergence, a good deal of talk, some of it insightful and thoughtful, about why he's done so well, and many expressions of hope that he would be defeated."
"The key task now, to once again paraphrase Karl Marx, is less to understand Trump than to stop him," Kristol wrote. "In general, there's a little too much hand-wringing, brow-furrowing, and fatalism out there and not quite enough resolving to save the party from nominating or the country electing someone who simply shouldn't be president."
A highlight of the gathering was a presentation by Rove about focus group findings on Trump. The business mogul's greatest weakness, according to Rove, was that voters have a very hard time envisioning him as "presidential" and as somebody their children should look up to. They also see him as somebody who can be erratic and shouldn't have his (small) fingers anywhere near a nuclear trigger.
Source
|
I still don't understand what this has to do lobbying. It's usually defined along the lines of "experts bring their knowledge into politics as a third party to assert influence on the political process". This can be good if the expertise they bring in actually makes sense and if they're enhancing policies as a result. If lobbyists largely consist of think tanks that conjure up dissent to get a ROI lobbyism has become utterly dysfunctional. This is arguably the case in the US.
Unions have nothing to do with this. Unions represent their members and use collective bargaining as a tool to get more representation in their jobs and better wages. For the most part their influence depends on their size, they're not making up stuff or try to influence public discourse with fabricated information.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On March 08 2016 09:20 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2016 09:16 Naracs_Duc wrote:On March 08 2016 09:09 Nyxisto wrote:On March 08 2016 09:02 Naracs_Duc wrote:On March 08 2016 09:00 Nyxisto wrote:On March 08 2016 08:53 oneofthem wrote:On March 08 2016 08:47 Simberto wrote:On March 08 2016 08:43 oneofthem wrote:On March 08 2016 08:18 Souma wrote:On March 08 2016 08:11 oneofthem wrote:
how do sandernistas reconcile hillary's demonic presence to the gop with her alleged corruption. are republicans sincere crusaders of integrity? What kind of stupid question is this? Just because one entity is bad it has to make the other good? No, they're all crap. for real though why do you think the gop hate her The statement is simply utterly irrational. Just because two people are corrupt does not mean they are on the same side. If i am bought by the beef lobby, and you are bought by the tofu lobby, despite the fact that we are both bought we are still very much opposed and will champion very different agendas, and thus try to make the other look bad. answer is hillary is powerful and in control of a political machine best equipped to challenge republican organization. corruption does not drive hate but rather policy difference and threat level. it is also ignorant to equate lobbying with corruption Given that half of the US is somehow convinced that climate change does not exist or don't see it as a serious issue you're actually going to tell me that there is anything more than a meaningless semantic difference between lobbying and corruption? Teachers and their corrupt lobbying. Nurses and their corrupt lobbying. Pro Choice groups and their corrupt lobbying. Planned Parenthood and their corrupt lobbying. Unions and their corrupt lobbying. ANYONE can lobby and the only thing making them corrupt is whether or not you disagree with what they are fighting for. No, I think what makes them corrupt is whether they're using large amounts of money to circumvent the democratic process. Nurses teachers and women have powerful organisations because there are a lot of them. They aren't filthy rich and they most of the time don't have powerful political allies or large shady donors. It's just people representing their interests as it should be in a democratic system. When one corporation or family can match this simply because of the size of their wallet you have a problem. Just because you agree with a lobbyist does not make that lobbyist no longer corrupt. And just because you disagree with a lobbyist does not mean that lobbyist is corrupt. Do you know how change is done? With money. Do you know how rights are protected and laws enforced? With money. Just because there are people who have different views than you does not make them corrupt nor does it make you innocent. this doesn't even address what I am saying. And if it is true that money is the sole facilitator of political change you are just confirming my point Show nested quote +On March 08 2016 09:17 oneofthem wrote:On March 08 2016 09:00 Nyxisto wrote:On March 08 2016 08:53 oneofthem wrote:On March 08 2016 08:47 Simberto wrote:On March 08 2016 08:43 oneofthem wrote:On March 08 2016 08:18 Souma wrote:On March 08 2016 08:11 oneofthem wrote:
how do sandernistas reconcile hillary's demonic presence to the gop with her alleged corruption. are republicans sincere crusaders of integrity? What kind of stupid question is this? Just because one entity is bad it has to make the other good? No, they're all crap. for real though why do you think the gop hate her The statement is simply utterly irrational. Just because two people are corrupt does not mean they are on the same side. If i am bought by the beef lobby, and you are bought by the tofu lobby, despite the fact that we are both bought we are still very much opposed and will champion very different agendas, and thus try to make the other look bad. answer is hillary is powerful and in control of a political machine best equipped to challenge republican organization. corruption does not drive hate but rather policy difference and threat level. it is also ignorant to equate lobbying with corruption Given that half of the US is somehow convinced that climate change does not exist or don't see it as a serious issue you're actually going to tell me that there is anything more than a meaningless semantic difference between lobbying and corruption and that it's all experts bringing the knowledge in? lol but that isn't even an example of lobbying. how the fuck is conservative think tanks throwing tons of money at the political process and the media to influence policy making not lobbying? Show nested quote +On March 08 2016 09:15 Ghostcom wrote:
We also have a tradition for doing 3-part negotiations where the government, the workers and the business together agree on how to move forward (and thus you remove some of the lobbying by it being taken care of in a more honest deal between the people with vested interests) so Danish politics really is like Borgen?
the general public isn't a political functionary. It is not lobbying just propaganda
|
I'm sick of the cultural appropriation bullshit too but that is still not sufficient reason to vote for someone like Trump or Cruz.
|
People seem to be a little bit ignorant about what lobbying is and when its good/bad...
Propaganda and using huge amounts of money to influence the public is not lobbying
There are many, many more nefarious and evil ways people use lobbying to their advantage.
To list them all would take forever.
The most effective is the old favourite, take contracts from the government, take on their projects, and then make them fail unless you get what you want.
Its illegal (in the UK at least) but workable.
What little regulation does exist with regards to lobbying is basically so full of loopholes, or completely unenforcable anyway, at this point that its anything goes.
Changing that means its harder to start up government projects, the whole relationship dynamic between government/business changes completely and no-one is up for that lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
