| Forum Index > Closed |
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. | ||
|
Blisse
Canada3710 Posts
On October 25 2016 04:48 Sermokala wrote: I thought this was a great video to watch to understand why republicans and democrats act the way they do and the fundamental way power works in human societies and hasn't changed fundamentally for a long time. Really cool video, thanks | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On October 25 2016 06:05 WolfintheSheep wrote: Actually, my theory is that they got hundreds of thousands of emails about Clinton and said "there must be big dirt here!" So they announced in advance that there were smoking guns that would destroy her before looking through them. And then started panicking when they searched and searched and searched and found everything was just average. This is what I think as well. It's interesting to see how the Republican smear was so effective over all these years that it ended up finding a home in the far left. | ||
|
Banaora
Germany234 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Dan HH
Romania9248 Posts
On October 25 2016 06:05 WolfintheSheep wrote: Actually, my theory is that they got hundreds of thousands of emails about Clinton and said "there must be big dirt here!" So they announced in advance that there were smoking guns that would destroy her before looking through them. And then started panicking when they searched and searched and searched and found everything was just average. I don't think they ever said that, their announcement of the upcoming leaks (that we now know were the Podesta emails) was very vague. It was Trump supporters that worked themselves up in a frenzy over the possibilities and started writing about how the leak will end her | ||
|
IgnE
United States7684 Posts
On October 25 2016 06:16 Plansix wrote: Folks who remember 2008-2010 know that the far left is the enemy of centrist democrats. They spent more time fighting each other, because the far left would rather pass something that will get thrown out by the Supreme Court than accomplish something. And the whole time the GOP quietly planned to take back the house in 2010, right in time for redistricting. what did the far left pass that got thrown out by the supreme court? | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On October 25 2016 06:25 IgnE wrote: what did the far left pass that got thrown out by the supreme court? The big debate of the ACA wasn’t if it would exist, but if it would be single payer or straight up state healthcare. The internal fight in the DNC over the ACA dragged out the process and prevent a lot of other issues from coming to the table. Most democrats I know bemoan that more was not accomplished during those two years because of the fight over the ACA, which barely made it pass the supreme court. | ||
|
WolfintheSheep
Canada14127 Posts
On October 25 2016 06:21 Dan HH wrote: I don't think they ever said that, their announcement of the upcoming leaks (that we now know were the Podesta emails) was very vague. It was Trump supporters that worked themselves up in a frenzy over the possibilities and started writing about how the leak will end her Wasn't it last week (or the week before?) that there was supposed to be a big announcement of something that would cripple Clinton's campaign. And then the announcement was a bunch of advertising and Assange saying the release was pushed back. | ||
|
Nevuk
United States16280 Posts
On October 25 2016 06:29 Plansix wrote: The big debate of the ACA wasn’t if it would exist, but if it would be single payer or straight up state healthcare. The internal fight in the DNC over the ACA dragged out the process and prevent a lot of other issues from coming to the table. Most democrats I know bemoan that more was not accomplished during those two years because of the fight over the ACA, which barely made it pass the supreme court. This is a mischaracterization. The argument used by centrist democrats was that a single payer plan wouldn't get GOP votes. Well, guess what? The non-single payer plan got 0 GOP votes. The democrats folded like cheap suits in return for absolutely nothing. The only leftist I can recall who actually staked any political capital on single payer was Kucinich. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On October 25 2016 06:35 Nevuk wrote: This is a mischaracterization. The argument used by centrist democrats was that a single payer plan wouldn't get GOP votes. Well, guess what? The non-single payer plan got 0 GOP votes. The democrats folded like cheap suits in return for absolutely nothing. The only leftist I can recall who actually staked any political capital on single payer was Kucinich. Getting any health care reform passed that survived a Supreme Court challenge is a huge deal. And trying to pass a plan that they could get bipartisan support on was the right way to go, even if it didn’t pan out. They can’t control the GOP and that they held a party line vote. Those were the early days of the GOP’s “oppose everything forever” stance on the Obama administration, so it seemed like the right way to go at the time. Plus a lot of center leaning democrats were aware of how hard mid terms were going to be. And the DNC didn’t cave. Ted Kennedy died and they had to slam out the ACA to prevent it from becoming dead in the water and they accomplished nothing. | ||
|
biology]major
United States2253 Posts
On October 25 2016 05:29 KwarK wrote: I don't feel that I am. Someone posts them, I explain that they're not real and that's pretty much it, isn't it? I don't see how it's any different from the Planned Parenthood videos. I don't get this, the DNC fired two people, and the Clinton campaign had to directly address the issue to the press. It has been covered by most media outlets as well. Reasonable person: "hmm this vid obviously has bias and an agenda" --> watches with skepticism Shills on TL --> "nope" | ||
|
IgnE
United States7684 Posts
On October 25 2016 06:41 Plansix wrote: Getting any health care reform passed that survived a Supreme Court challenge is a huge deal. And trying to pass a plan that they could get bipartisan support on was the right way to go, even if it didn’t pan out. They can’t control the GOP and that they held a party line vote. Those were the early days of the GOP’s “oppose everything forever” stance on the Obama administration, so it seemed like the right way to go at the time. And the DNC didn’t cave. Ted Kennedy died and they had to slam out the ACA to prevent it from becoming dead in the water. are you suggesting single payer would be unconstitutional? | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On October 25 2016 06:43 IgnE wrote: are you suggesting single payer would be unconstitutional? My opinion on if it is constitutional or not is irrelevant. I am not convinced that anything more than the ACA’s current design would have survived before the current justices on the court. The only reason is passed was because Roberts flipped and signed with the left leaning justices. Single payer might be an option if Clinton gets to appoint someone through a senate controlled by the democrats. But not in 2008. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18869 Posts
On October 25 2016 06:48 Plansix wrote: My opinion on if it is constitutional or not is irrelevant. I am not convinced that anything more than the ACA’s current design would have survived before the current justices on the court. The only reason is passed was because of Samuel Alito flipped and signed with the left leaning justices. Single payer might be an option if Clinton gets to appoint someone through a senate controlled by the democrats. But not in 2008. Alito did not join the majority in either landmark ACA case. | ||
|
Dan HH
Romania9248 Posts
On October 25 2016 06:34 WolfintheSheep wrote: Wasn't it last week (or the week before?) that there was supposed to be a big announcement of something that would cripple Clinton's campaign. And then the announcement was a bunch of advertising and Assange saying the release was pushed back. What I was talking about happened in June or July when Assange said to a Britsh TV channel (I forget which) that they have upcoming leaks related to Hillary. That's when the blogs/forums ran wild with hyperbole and created the high expectations for how it was gonna destroy her. As for that recent press conference that upset Alex Jones, I don't think Wikileaks/Assange actually said that it was gonna be about Clinton leaks at all, let alone that that they have something that will cripple her campaign, I think it was just something that people assumed based on the earlier hype. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On October 25 2016 06:50 farvacola wrote: Alito did not join the majority in either landmark ACA case. Yeah, I edited. For some reason Alito and Roberts are crosswired in my head. I confuse the two all the time and there is zero good reason for it. But the fact that Kennedy did not go for it makes me worried for any update to the ACA without a new court with more justices appointed by democrats. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
In further updates, Wikileaks appears to not understand the journalist for major news sites can't be bought with a couple free dinners. We try to educate folks that paying for dinner doesn't mean you are owed something afterwords, but wikileaks missed the memo apparently. If they have anything more damning, I don't know if anyone will pay attention if they cry wolf to many more times. | ||
|
Dan HH
Romania9248 Posts
On October 25 2016 06:56 Plansix wrote: https://twitter.com/byrontau/status/790643313070206977 In further updates, Wikileaks appears to not understand the journalist for major news sites can't be bought with a couple free dinners. We try to educate folks that paying for dinner doesn't mean you are owed something afterwords, but wikileaks missed the memo apparently. Watch yourself Plansix, Wikileaks have started a department of truth and they're coming to fix your comment + Show Spoiler + | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On October 25 2016 06:56 Plansix wrote: https://twitter.com/byrontau/status/790643313070206977 In further updates, Wikileaks appears to not understand the journalist for major news sites can't be bought with a couple free dinners. We try to educate folks that paying for dinner doesn't mean you are owed something afterwords, but wikileaks missed the memo apparently. If they have anything more damning, I don't know if anyone will pay attention if they cry wolf to many more times. Amazing. Simply amazing. Someone please tell me why that Tweet by Wikileaks does not body slam any amount of credibility they may have had. This is exactly what I said Wikileaks is doing weeks ago. They post things as inflammatory tweets, knowing damn well they are extremely misleading and that people will just assume this is a really bad thing. | ||
|
Logo
United States7542 Posts
On October 25 2016 05:52 zlefin wrote: logo -> do you want any more responses on that guy? Eh, not unless you want to write it. I appreciate the look, and am resigned back to wishing there were some decent 3rd party candidates. | ||
| ||
|
|
Online Event
Korean StarCraft League
Afreeca Starleague
Rush vs Soulkey
CranKy Ducklings
AI Arena Tournament
BSL Open Qualifier
Sparkling Tuna Cup
OSC
IPSL
BSL Open Qualifier
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
