US Politics Mega-thread - Page 4772

On August 19 2016 01:09 WolfintheSheep wrote:

Congratulations on the first step back to a civilized society?

On August 19 2016 00:54 Adreme wrote:


It was because they needed 100% of all democrats in the senate on board in order to pass it and thats a very tall order to get everyone in a party on board a single piece of legislation all because of the pointless and unneeded filibuster.

On August 19 2016 01:12 Plansix wrote:
One of the problems I have with the progressive wing of the democratic party is that they don’t plan for the Republicans undoing the laws they create. They want to make huge, disruptive leaps forward, but don’t plan for the public turning against that plan when it gets hard and voting people in to undo the entire thing.

On August 19 2016 00:08 Dan HH wrote:


What the fuck is he talking about?

On August 19 2016 01:18 TheYango wrote:

To be fair, the Republicans are trying to make that happen to the ACA anyway.

On August 19 2016 01:22 TheTenthDoc wrote:
I suspect the SCOTUS decisions would have completely gutted any public option that made it through the Senate as well, since it would almost certainly have ended up tied to the Medicaid expansion and offered at the state level.

Of course, that's not a great reason not to include it, but I doubt we'd be much better off (at least in the states that are in the worst trouble since they denied the expansion).

On August 19 2016 01:25 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Trump is saying liken the BREXIT campaign in the Uk that was expected to lose and down in the Polls he will make a comeback and win.

On August 19 2016 01:03 Plansix wrote:
The filibuster itself is a great tool to stop bad bills or for a minority opinion/view to be heard. I am reluctant to remove any tools that would limit the power of the minority in the senate, which is already pretty weak.

On August 19 2016 01:33 Mohdoo wrote:
What if Trump proposes the states he is favored to win "BREXIT" from the US?

On August 19 2016 01:35 Gorsameth wrote:

Secession is not allowed in the US so not legally possible.

Fortunately Trump doesnt even know what is legal or not so lets go!.

On August 19 2016 01:33 Mohdoo wrote:
What if Trump proposes the states he is favored to win "BREXIT" from the US?

The residents of a small coastal Alaskan village have voted to move to the mainland because of rising sea levels, but they may not have the funds to do it.

The 600-person village of Shishmaref, located on an island just north of the Bering Strait, has for decades been ravaged by erosion tied to climate change, leading residents to seek a more sustainable place to live.

But the community is racked by poverty, making it difficult to relocate, which is estimated to cost $180m.

Officials held a special election on Tuesday so residents could vote on whether to relocate or to stay and add environmental defenses. The vote was relatively close, with 89 for relocating and 78 to remain.

But both choices came with a steep price tag. The most recent estimate on relocating, from a 2004 Army Corps of Engineers study, was $180m. Officials said it would cost $110m for the environmental protections needed for the community to safely stay in one of Alaska’s most eroded coastal areas.

Mayor Harold Weyiouanna Sr told local news channel KTUU that doing nothing was not an option because while land crumbles into the sea, the community continues to grow.

“They did put a seawall or rock walls up, and it seems to be holding, but we need more protection to protect the whole island,” Weyiouanna said.

The US Government Accountability Office (GAO) said Shishmaref is one of 31 villages that face “imminent threats” from flooding and coastal erosion.

Shishmaref residents have been considering relocation since the mid-1970s, when it first introduced shoreline defense structures. The community also voted to leave in 2002, but was unable to because of cost.

On August 19 2016 01:33 TMagpie wrote:


Not only are filibusters great in practice at giving minorities a voice, it's also a philosophical no brainer.

"Does anyone have anymore information they'd like to add before we decide the fate of 300 million people?"

Is it a misused strategy at times? Yes. Does it make a mockery of what we expect the game should be? Sort of. But sometimes you 4pool in game 5 because yolo, that's how you get your wins.

On August 19 2016 01:49 KwarK wrote:
600 people. Let's assume you just give each of them $100,000 and tell them "good luck on the mainland". For a family of four that's $400,000. Total cost $60m. How the fuck have they got the costs at $180m.