|
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. |
On May 16 2017 09:15 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2017 09:01 micronesia wrote:
@ Dangers and DPB: Then how about you both take a step back and actually lay out your policy goals and explain how they align with the current parties, administration, or other candidates? Maybe there would actually be something to discuss then other than the tweet of the hour. @who? Seriously. I'm hoping we can actually identify that (1) it's not close minded to currently support the party that most aligns with your politics (2) it's absolutely closed minded to only spout arguments meant to criticize said politics. Until that conflict is resolved, there's no point asking for goals and alignments because they historically and currently aren't even being examined. I'd rather talk about the tweet of the hour than someone who can't note the difference between holding political beliefs and attacking the beliefs of others. I don't know if you need to re-read the last ten pages to understand it can be a fundamentally fruitless exercise if you take a step back from your own personal political beliefs.
People are against Trump because (aside from general incompetence) he is directly attacking policies they support. Things like a right to healthcare, equality (or atleast not making it worse).
You can't blame people for asking what policies you are looking for when you defend your choice of voting for Trump.
|
On May 16 2017 09:22 Wulfey_LA wrote:
Can you imagine what would be happening right now if Pence had won? ACA repealed. Capital gains taxes eliminated. Medicaid/Medicare replaced by vouchers. Public schools replaced by vouchers. Pass through taxation eliminated. Payroll taxes increased to offset upper income tax cuts. Full Dodd-Frank repeal with a totality repeal of every regulation of leverage.
Every Trump scandal like this is literally saving the country from policy catastrophes. Moreover, his idiocy may be the thing that finally gets the Democrats to get back to being a broad party that accepts the moderate refugees from the Republicans. I am loving this.
If Pence had won? Last thing he ran for in his own right was was governorship of Indiana, and he won that. He was not a presidential candidate.
|
On May 16 2017 09:22 Wulfey_LA wrote:
Can you imagine what would be happening right now if Pence had won? ACA repealed. Capital gains taxes eliminated. Medicaid/Medicare replaced by vouchers. Public schools replaced by vouchers. Pass through taxation eliminated. Payroll taxes increased to offset upper income tax cuts. Full Dodd-Frank repeal with a totality repeal of every regulation of leverage.
Every Trump scandal like this is literally saving the country from policy catastrophes. Moreover, his idiocy may be the thing that finally gets the Democrats to get back to being a broad party that accepts the moderate refugees from the Republicans. I am loving this.
Nah, Trumps failures to pass any legislation isn't a problem of Trump himself. He isn't writing the laws, or even close in the process of drafting them. Congress handles that.
The big reason those plans are stalled (for now) is because there are enough Republicans who fear for their re-election if they repeal the ACA or pass a tax cut for the rich ect.
|
On May 16 2017 09:24 Uldridge wrote:I'll ask it again, for the 5th time, I guess. Could you please provide me with what you are standing behind politically and why do you think Trump has the potential to be a great president? I think this was originally for xDaunt, but I think you (Danglars) align well enough with him that you can fill in for him. Or you can both give me some stuff where you think the other is lacking, I don't care, I just want to know from the other side why you believe in what you believe. I am all for fruitful discussion. Perhaps we can find some middle ground... somewhere (even though I'm pretty skeptical about that if I'm putting all my cards on the table  )
I cannot speak for xDaunt. We had the US Politics Megathread Racist Witch Hunt last year and I can speak only for myself. If my incidental word choice is construed by some of our more attenuated posters as disparaging to a race, I am the only guilty party.
The required reading on the topic of my reluctant Trump support in the election is The flight 93 election that outlines mainstream conservative positions and how Trump fits into them. The diagnosis and skeptical solution is in keeping with my personal views on the subject. If you want mindset, a blog gave a healthy dose of the rationale. I don't know if any middle ground is possible until the aftermath of the 2018 election. I've seen very little circumspection on why Trump won in the first place and why Trump polls ahead of the media and both parties last time I checked. I have no expectation that will change this year.
|
On May 16 2017 09:30 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2017 09:22 Wulfey_LA wrote:
Can you imagine what would be happening right now if Pence had won? ACA repealed. Capital gains taxes eliminated. Medicaid/Medicare replaced by vouchers. Public schools replaced by vouchers. Pass through taxation eliminated. Payroll taxes increased to offset upper income tax cuts. Full Dodd-Frank repeal with a totality repeal of every regulation of leverage.
Every Trump scandal like this is literally saving the country from policy catastrophes. Moreover, his idiocy may be the thing that finally gets the Democrats to get back to being a broad party that accepts the moderate refugees from the Republicans. I am loving this. Nah, Trumps failures to pass any legislation isn't a problem of Trump himself. He isn't writing the laws, or even close in the process of drafting them. Congress handles that. The big reason those plans are stalled (for now) is because there are enough Republicans who fear for their re-election if they repeal the ACA or pass a tax cut for the rich ect.
-Danglars -- okay, imagine he magically became President. Then think of all the actual policy changes.
-Gosameth -- You really think this endless cycle of shit is keeping the rightist bills away? Compare today to Obama's today in his term. The stimulus had passed. Dodd-Frank and ACA were actually in the works. Trump isn't out there making that consensus happen.
EDIT: John Podhoretz makes my point better. The gist: unless all the most recent Trump story is a lie, the legislative agenda for 2017 is dead.
https://www.commentarymagazine.com/politics-ideas/trumps-supposed-leak-the-worst-thing-yet/
|
On May 16 2017 08:28 biology]major wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2017 08:23 hunts wrote:On May 16 2017 08:17 xDaunt wrote:
So we have an article that says that Trump disclosed "highly classified information" without saying what the information is or the purpose of its disclosure. The sole purpose is to make Trump look bad. I can think of a whole bunch of legitimate reasons why we'd share classified information with Russia or any other state for that matter. This is more fake news in action. And how many of those reasons would you be able to think of if it was president Obama or Hillary Clinton being accused of this, and not donnie? That's the hilarious part, this thread is like an experiment into how far people on both sides, myself included, will go to defend those who they percieve in a positive notion and the opposite for someone they perceive in a negative notion. We had people minimizing all clinton's faults back then, whereas the right wing posters would relentlessly attack. Now the tides have turned and we are seeing the opposite. It's a duh statement, but it's really funny when you just take a step back and look at the positions taken by the posters and use the litmus test of : "how would you react if this was hillary clinton." I know danglars thinks he's immune to these hypotheticals, but we already have proof in this thread how people react: Like partisan hacks.
This might be one of the only things I've seen you post that I agree with. It is funny seeing the mental gymastics that seem to happen in political discussions. With people's views on things flip flopping based on which side is involed.
|
On May 16 2017 09:50 hunts wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2017 08:28 biology]major wrote:On May 16 2017 08:23 hunts wrote:On May 16 2017 08:17 xDaunt wrote:
So we have an article that says that Trump disclosed "highly classified information" without saying what the information is or the purpose of its disclosure. The sole purpose is to make Trump look bad. I can think of a whole bunch of legitimate reasons why we'd share classified information with Russia or any other state for that matter. This is more fake news in action. And how many of those reasons would you be able to think of if it was president Obama or Hillary Clinton being accused of this, and not donnie? That's the hilarious part, this thread is like an experiment into how far people on both sides, myself included, will go to defend those who they percieve in a positive notion and the opposite for someone they perceive in a negative notion. We had people minimizing all clinton's faults back then, whereas the right wing posters would relentlessly attack. Now the tides have turned and we are seeing the opposite. It's a duh statement, but it's really funny when you just take a step back and look at the positions taken by the posters and use the litmus test of : "how would you react if this was hillary clinton." I know danglars thinks he's immune to these hypotheticals, but we already have proof in this thread how people react: Like partisan hacks. This might be one of the only things I've seen you post that I agree with. It is funny seeing the mental gymastics that seem to happen in political discussions. With people's views on things flip flopping based on which side is involed.
I don't understand the attachment to Trump, we all knew he was a dice roll, and it didn't turn out great. The 7d underwater blindfolded starcraft was actually just checkers with a 5 year old. I expected some sort of change, and action. Instead we got a shit show. Luckily, I have no attachment to him, and would much prefer Pence to take over. We can debate policy/philosophy/ideology but at least the guy has a smooth temperament and we won't have a crisis every week. We probably won't have to hear the word Russia as frequently either which I think would be a welcome change.
|
The reporter who broke the story refutes the WHs claim that everything was above board. States the WH knew it was a problem and altered security partners right after the meeting.
|
On May 16 2017 08:58 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2017 08:28 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On May 16 2017 08:12 Danglars wrote:On May 16 2017 07:35 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On May 16 2017 07:24 xDaunt wrote:On May 16 2017 06:44 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On May 16 2017 04:13 xDaunt wrote:On May 16 2017 04:00 Danglars wrote:On May 16 2017 02:27 Velr wrote:
If you voted trump and still would, yes, your the very definition of stupid partisanship.
I can get behind plenty of conservative (not religious conservative) positions because i deal with hardcore conservatives everyday (which tend to be a bit more religious here too).
I don't agree with them but i see where they are comming from and thanks to my job i see the stupidity of the left daily.
The thing is: If you now still stand behind trump, you better get paid by him or your just dillusional and want your country to go down.
Ffs "not voting for someone like trump" is actually the best argument "the establishment" had against the hard right since... i don't know, i'm 34 and don't remember such a shitshow in any modern/firstworld country.
Berlusconi looked better than Trump when he was at his worst. Which is why I have to keep bringing it up. Because people don't believe there were actually two choices at play, and there's compelling arguments for repeating that vote for Trump. Oh, and by the way, this continually blasting of Trump's mistakes while recognizing none of the background arguments is called nonpartisanship or something by the left and it's frankly drop-dead hilarious. "He's objectively ..." mmhmm I'll listen in when hardcore alt-Left and regressive-Left persons make conservative positions not look unideological. You'll have to take off the horse blinders while staring gape-mouthed at Trump for maybe a couple weeks to notice the media, DNC, and leftist cultural warriors are all complicit. Now let's all repeat together that Trump is awful and all his supporters are "delusional and want your country to go down." Because that's how you show you're above "the very definition of stupid partisanship." Jesus Christ, this x1000. Given my stated positions and policy preferences, who the fuck am I supposed to vote for if not Trump? Sure as shit won't be a Democrat for obvious reasons. And which Republican should I be voting for? Most of them sucked donkey ass last time around, and I'm not holding out hope that the next crop will be much better if Trump fails. Literally every other Republican candidate (besides Carson when he was sleepwalking) could speak in complete sentences, which is a low threshold for the President of the United States but at least disqualifies Donald Trump. I don't understand why you're so closed-minded when it comes to politics. Why is "being a Democrat" automatic disqualification, in your opinion? I'm not close minded to anything. My political values distinctly align with the political Right. When the democrats start pushing a Right-leaning agenda, then I'll consider voting for them. So your values "distinctly align" with killing healthcare, killing education, taking from the poor to give to the rich, and suppressing civil rights? Because in 2017, we're way passed saying something as unnuanced as "I'm a Republican because I believe in fiscal responsibility". There is sooo much more to that party, and it's killing our country. Like, excuse us Republicans, we're trying to have a society over here... I don't know why you even affect to discuss values. If your only experience with political values is the disingenuous political talking points like Republicans want to push granny of the cliff, you neither know nor understand the values. Furthermore, it's hard to see if explaining them will actually produce understanding. We're trying to have a debate, you're trying to declare victory over the debate and move on. It's a very stultifying concept and ought to be relegated to authoritarian societies. How is it disengenuous when the push for the AHCA over the ACA is a very real possibility by Republicans? You really can't get much closer to pushing granny off a cliff than that. Show nested quote +killing healthcare, killing education, taking from the poor to give to the rich, and suppressing civil rights The discussion was political values and you're busy dishing out Democratic talking points. That's absolutely disingenuous. Perhaps you'd only recognize that if you said you had differing political values, and I offered that you wanted to bankrupt the country, remove political power from elected leaders, trash civil rights, and subvert the rule of law. Oh, and then I defend myself by saying that all these things are true, why bother denying it? I'm referring to that disingenuousness. It's entirely self serving to disparage support for the GOP ("you're so close minded") and then ignore the political values that align (all the partisan attacks on policy arguments).
He said he could never vote Democrat "for obvious reasons", and I asked him why and he said because he aligns with the political Right, and then I listed some very real platforms that the Republican Party has been pushing and asked him if he actually aligns with those ideas, and then you came in, accusing me of dishing out Democratic talking points.
It's not partisan to point out that Republicans are actively trying to undermine the ideas I listed. They're objectively doing that by trying to replace the ACA with the AHCA, favoring charter schools over fixing public education, giving tax breaks to the rich and ignoring the middle class, and setting us back plenty on civil rights issues. All of those are facts. You accusing me of pushing these facts with the intent of pushing partisanship is only validating the idea that the Democrats are more sensible than Republicans in these areas. Your indignant "How dare you!" isn't a counterargument.
|
On May 16 2017 10:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2017 08:58 Danglars wrote:On May 16 2017 08:28 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On May 16 2017 08:12 Danglars wrote:On May 16 2017 07:35 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On May 16 2017 07:24 xDaunt wrote:On May 16 2017 06:44 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On May 16 2017 04:13 xDaunt wrote:On May 16 2017 04:00 Danglars wrote:On May 16 2017 02:27 Velr wrote:
If you voted trump and still would, yes, your the very definition of stupid partisanship.
I can get behind plenty of conservative (not religious conservative) positions because i deal with hardcore conservatives everyday (which tend to be a bit more religious here too).
I don't agree with them but i see where they are comming from and thanks to my job i see the stupidity of the left daily.
The thing is: If you now still stand behind trump, you better get paid by him or your just dillusional and want your country to go down.
Ffs "not voting for someone like trump" is actually the best argument "the establishment" had against the hard right since... i don't know, i'm 34 and don't remember such a shitshow in any modern/firstworld country.
Berlusconi looked better than Trump when he was at his worst. Which is why I have to keep bringing it up. Because people don't believe there were actually two choices at play, and there's compelling arguments for repeating that vote for Trump. Oh, and by the way, this continually blasting of Trump's mistakes while recognizing none of the background arguments is called nonpartisanship or something by the left and it's frankly drop-dead hilarious. "He's objectively ..." mmhmm I'll listen in when hardcore alt-Left and regressive-Left persons make conservative positions not look unideological. You'll have to take off the horse blinders while staring gape-mouthed at Trump for maybe a couple weeks to notice the media, DNC, and leftist cultural warriors are all complicit. Now let's all repeat together that Trump is awful and all his supporters are "delusional and want your country to go down." Because that's how you show you're above "the very definition of stupid partisanship." Jesus Christ, this x1000. Given my stated positions and policy preferences, who the fuck am I supposed to vote for if not Trump? Sure as shit won't be a Democrat for obvious reasons. And which Republican should I be voting for? Most of them sucked donkey ass last time around, and I'm not holding out hope that the next crop will be much better if Trump fails. Literally every other Republican candidate (besides Carson when he was sleepwalking) could speak in complete sentences, which is a low threshold for the President of the United States but at least disqualifies Donald Trump. I don't understand why you're so closed-minded when it comes to politics. Why is "being a Democrat" automatic disqualification, in your opinion? I'm not close minded to anything. My political values distinctly align with the political Right. When the democrats start pushing a Right-leaning agenda, then I'll consider voting for them. So your values "distinctly align" with killing healthcare, killing education, taking from the poor to give to the rich, and suppressing civil rights? Because in 2017, we're way passed saying something as unnuanced as "I'm a Republican because I believe in fiscal responsibility". There is sooo much more to that party, and it's killing our country. Like, excuse us Republicans, we're trying to have a society over here... I don't know why you even affect to discuss values. If your only experience with political values is the disingenuous political talking points like Republicans want to push granny of the cliff, you neither know nor understand the values. Furthermore, it's hard to see if explaining them will actually produce understanding. We're trying to have a debate, you're trying to declare victory over the debate and move on. It's a very stultifying concept and ought to be relegated to authoritarian societies. How is it disengenuous when the push for the AHCA over the ACA is a very real possibility by Republicans? You really can't get much closer to pushing granny off a cliff than that. killing healthcare, killing education, taking from the poor to give to the rich, and suppressing civil rights it's killing our country The discussion was political values and you're busy dishing out Democratic talking points. That's absolutely disingenuous. Perhaps you'd only recognize that if you said you had differing political values, and I offered that you wanted to bankrupt the country, remove political power from elected leaders, trash civil rights, and subvert the rule of law. Oh, and then I defend myself by saying that all these things are true, why bother denying it? I'm referring to that disingenuousness. It's entirely self serving to disparage support for the GOP ("you're so close minded") and then ignore the political values that align (all the partisan attacks on policy arguments). He said he could never vote Democrat "for obvious reasons", and I asked him why and he said because he aligns with the political Right, and then I listed some very real platforms that the Republican Party has been pushing and asked him if he actually aligns with those ideas, and then you came in, accusing me of dishing out Democratic talking points. It's not partisan to point out that Republicans are actively trying to undermine the ideas I listed. They're objectively doing that by trying to replace the ACA with the AHCA, favoring charter schools over fixing public education, giving tax breaks to the rich and ignoring the middle class, and setting us back plenty on civil rights issues. All of those are facts. You accusing me of pushing these facts with the intent of pushing partisanship is only validating the idea that the Democrats are more sensible than Republicans in these areas. Your indignant "How dare you!" isnt a counterargument.
You get how these aren't exactly impartial descriptions of these situations, right? I mean I agree with your assessments ultimately, but you have to realize that those are not just facts, they're judgments based partly on your political opinions.
|
On May 16 2017 10:07 ChristianS wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2017 10:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On May 16 2017 08:58 Danglars wrote:On May 16 2017 08:28 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On May 16 2017 08:12 Danglars wrote:On May 16 2017 07:35 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On May 16 2017 07:24 xDaunt wrote:On May 16 2017 06:44 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On May 16 2017 04:13 xDaunt wrote:On May 16 2017 04:00 Danglars wrote:
[quote]
Which is why I have to keep bringing it up. Because people don't believe there were actually two choices at play, and there's compelling arguments for repeating that vote for Trump. Oh, and by the way, this continually blasting of Trump's mistakes while recognizing none of the background arguments is called nonpartisanship or something by the left and it's frankly drop-dead hilarious. "He's objectively ..." mmhmm I'll listen in when hardcore alt-Left and regressive-Left persons make conservative positions not look unideological. You'll have to take off the horse blinders while staring gape-mouthed at Trump for maybe a couple weeks to notice the media, DNC, and leftist cultural warriors are all complicit.
Now let's all repeat together that Trump is awful and all his supporters are "delusional and want your country to go down." Because that's how you show you're above "the very definition of stupid partisanship." Jesus Christ, this x1000. Given my stated positions and policy preferences, who the fuck am I supposed to vote for if not Trump? Sure as shit won't be a Democrat for obvious reasons. And which Republican should I be voting for? Most of them sucked donkey ass last time around, and I'm not holding out hope that the next crop will be much better if Trump fails. Literally every other Republican candidate (besides Carson when he was sleepwalking) could speak in complete sentences, which is a low threshold for the President of the United States but at least disqualifies Donald Trump. I don't understand why you're so closed-minded when it comes to politics. Why is "being a Democrat" automatic disqualification, in your opinion? I'm not close minded to anything. My political values distinctly align with the political Right. When the democrats start pushing a Right-leaning agenda, then I'll consider voting for them. So your values "distinctly align" with killing healthcare, killing education, taking from the poor to give to the rich, and suppressing civil rights? Because in 2017, we're way passed saying something as unnuanced as "I'm a Republican because I believe in fiscal responsibility". There is sooo much more to that party, and it's killing our country. Like, excuse us Republicans, we're trying to have a society over here... I don't know why you even affect to discuss values. If your only experience with political values is the disingenuous political talking points like Republicans want to push granny of the cliff, you neither know nor understand the values. Furthermore, it's hard to see if explaining them will actually produce understanding. We're trying to have a debate, you're trying to declare victory over the debate and move on. It's a very stultifying concept and ought to be relegated to authoritarian societies. How is it disengenuous when the push for the AHCA over the ACA is a very real possibility by Republicans? You really can't get much closer to pushing granny off a cliff than that. killing healthcare, killing education, taking from the poor to give to the rich, and suppressing civil rights it's killing our country The discussion was political values and you're busy dishing out Democratic talking points. That's absolutely disingenuous. Perhaps you'd only recognize that if you said you had differing political values, and I offered that you wanted to bankrupt the country, remove political power from elected leaders, trash civil rights, and subvert the rule of law. Oh, and then I defend myself by saying that all these things are true, why bother denying it? I'm referring to that disingenuousness. It's entirely self serving to disparage support for the GOP ("you're so close minded") and then ignore the political values that align (all the partisan attacks on policy arguments). He said he could never vote Democrat "for obvious reasons", and I asked him why and he said because he aligns with the political Right, and then I listed some very real platforms that the Republican Party has been pushing and asked him if he actually aligns with those ideas, and then you came in, accusing me of dishing out Democratic talking points. It's not partisan to point out that Republicans are actively trying to undermine the ideas I listed. They're objectively doing that by trying to replace the ACA with the AHCA, favoring charter schools over fixing public education, giving tax breaks to the rich and ignoring the middle class, and setting us back plenty on civil rights issues. All of those are facts. You accusing me of pushing these facts with the intent of pushing partisanship is only validating the idea that the Democrats are more sensible than Republicans in these areas. Your indignant "How dare you!" isnt a counterargument. You get how these aren't exactly impartial descriptions of these situations, right? I mean I agree with your assessments ultimately, but you have to realize that those are not just facts, they're judgments based partly on your political opinions.
The educational research and data of public and charter schools don't even remotely support charter schools and the illusion of "school choice" as plausible solutions to our education system. The experts understand that, but then you have Betsy DeVos in charge instead of qualified people. It's not a casual difference of perspective or "based on my political opinions", and I think it should be repeated that one "side" is based on facts while the other "side" is not.
And on a similar note, there is plenty of data surrounding the importance of social and racial and gender equity and equality in a society, and it is absolutely not merely my political opinion that Republican leaders are finding ways to support the disenfranchisement of certain groups of people, whether it's based on voting restrictions, looking the other way when police overstep their boundaries, ignoring women's rights (not just solely an abortion issue), and treating the LGBT community like utter trash. These have long since been documented, and pointing these out is not just my political opinion.
I worry that the argument of "You have your political opinions and the other people have theirs" is an equivocation of the legitimacy that one opinion may have over the other. Not all opinions are equal or even really opinions, much like the misnomered evolution vs. creationism "debate", as if they're equally valid. (And fittingly, anti-science agendas fit neatly in the Republican domain as well, from ignoring climate change to promoting the "teach the controversy" nonsense. These are verifiable policies that some of the very socially conservative/ religious conservatives push, and calling an ignorant spade an ignorant spade might be crass but it's not automatically illegitimate.)
|
Republicans would oppose moving voting days to weekends because it would mean higher turn out.
|
On May 16 2017 09:39 Danglars wrote:I cannot speak for xDaunt. We had the US Politics Megathread Racist Witch Hunt last year and I can speak only for myself. If my incidental word choice is construed by some of our more attenuated posters as disparaging to a race, I am the only guilty party. The required reading on the topic of my reluctant Trump support in the election is The flight 93 election that outlines mainstream conservative positions and how Trump fits into them. The diagnosis and skeptical solution is in keeping with my personal views on the subject. If you want mindset, a blog gave a healthy dose of the rationale. I don't know if any middle ground is possible until the aftermath of the 2018 election. I've seen very little circumspection on why Trump won in the first place and why Trump polls ahead of the media and both parties last time I checked. I have no expectation that will change this year.
Thank you for your sincere reply, Danglars. I'll check it out in the near future, but have to go to sleep now ... it's waaaay too late!
|
On May 16 2017 10:22 Plansix wrote:
Republicans would oppose moving voting days to weekends because it would mean higher turn out.
And democrats play identity politics to get the minority vote, politics as usual
|
On May 16 2017 10:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2017 10:07 ChristianS wrote:On May 16 2017 10:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On May 16 2017 08:58 Danglars wrote:On May 16 2017 08:28 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On May 16 2017 08:12 Danglars wrote:On May 16 2017 07:35 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On May 16 2017 07:24 xDaunt wrote:On May 16 2017 06:44 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On May 16 2017 04:13 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
Jesus Christ, this x1000. Given my stated positions and policy preferences, who the fuck am I supposed to vote for if not Trump? Sure as shit won't be a Democrat for obvious reasons. And which Republican should I be voting for? Most of them sucked donkey ass last time around, and I'm not holding out hope that the next crop will be much better if Trump fails. Literally every other Republican candidate (besides Carson when he was sleepwalking) could speak in complete sentences, which is a low threshold for the President of the United States but at least disqualifies Donald Trump. I don't understand why you're so closed-minded when it comes to politics. Why is "being a Democrat" automatic disqualification, in your opinion? I'm not close minded to anything. My political values distinctly align with the political Right. When the democrats start pushing a Right-leaning agenda, then I'll consider voting for them. So your values "distinctly align" with killing healthcare, killing education, taking from the poor to give to the rich, and suppressing civil rights? Because in 2017, we're way passed saying something as unnuanced as "I'm a Republican because I believe in fiscal responsibility". There is sooo much more to that party, and it's killing our country. Like, excuse us Republicans, we're trying to have a society over here... I don't know why you even affect to discuss values. If your only experience with political values is the disingenuous political talking points like Republicans want to push granny of the cliff, you neither know nor understand the values. Furthermore, it's hard to see if explaining them will actually produce understanding. We're trying to have a debate, you're trying to declare victory over the debate and move on. It's a very stultifying concept and ought to be relegated to authoritarian societies. How is it disengenuous when the push for the AHCA over the ACA is a very real possibility by Republicans? You really can't get much closer to pushing granny off a cliff than that. killing healthcare, killing education, taking from the poor to give to the rich, and suppressing civil rights it's killing our country The discussion was political values and you're busy dishing out Democratic talking points. That's absolutely disingenuous. Perhaps you'd only recognize that if you said you had differing political values, and I offered that you wanted to bankrupt the country, remove political power from elected leaders, trash civil rights, and subvert the rule of law. Oh, and then I defend myself by saying that all these things are true, why bother denying it? I'm referring to that disingenuousness. It's entirely self serving to disparage support for the GOP ("you're so close minded") and then ignore the political values that align (all the partisan attacks on policy arguments). He said he could never vote Democrat "for obvious reasons", and I asked him why and he said because he aligns with the political Right, and then I listed some very real platforms that the Republican Party has been pushing and asked him if he actually aligns with those ideas, and then you came in, accusing me of dishing out Democratic talking points. It's not partisan to point out that Republicans are actively trying to undermine the ideas I listed. They're objectively doing that by trying to replace the ACA with the AHCA, favoring charter schools over fixing public education, giving tax breaks to the rich and ignoring the middle class, and setting us back plenty on civil rights issues. All of those are facts. You accusing me of pushing these facts with the intent of pushing partisanship is only validating the idea that the Democrats are more sensible than Republicans in these areas. Your indignant "How dare you!" isnt a counterargument. You get how these aren't exactly impartial descriptions of these situations, right? I mean I agree with your assessments ultimately, but you have to realize that those are not just facts, they're judgments based partly on your political opinions. The educational research and data of public and charter schools don't even remotely support charter schools and the illusion of "school choice" as plausible solutions to our education system. The experts understand that, but then you have Betsy DeVos in charge instead of qualified people. It's not a casual difference of perspective or "based on my political opinions", and I think it should be repeated that one "side" is based on facts while the other "side" is not. And on a similar note, there is plenty of data surrounding the importance of social and racial and gender equity and equality in a society, and it is absolutely not merely my political opinion that Republican leaders are finding ways to support the disenfranchisement of certain groups of people, whether it's based on voting restrictions, looking the other way when police overstep their boundaries, ignoring women's rights (not just solely an abortion issue), and treating the LGBT community like utter trash. These have long since been documented, and pointing these out is not just my political opinion. I worry that the argument of "You have your political opinions and the other people have theirs" is an equivocation of the legitimacy that one opinion may have over the other. Not all opinions are equal or even really opinions, much like the misnomered evolution vs. creationism "debate", as if they're equally valid. (And fittingly, anti-science agendas fit neatly in the Republican domain as well, from ignoring climate change to promoting the "teach the controversy" nonsense. These are verifiable policies that some of the very socially conservative/ religious conservatives push, and calling an ignorant spade an ignorant spade might be crass but it's not automatically illegitimate.)
Where does pushing granny off a cliff factor in? Do you think Republicans hate their grandparents?
|
On May 16 2017 10:29 biology]major wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2017 10:22 Plansix wrote:
Republicans would oppose moving voting days to weekends because it would mean higher turn out. And democrats play identity politics to get the minority vote, politics as usual
Catering to religious conservatives and people that are super into the confederate flag is just identity politics by another name. Hence the voter suppression.
|
On May 16 2017 10:33 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2017 10:29 biology]major wrote:On May 16 2017 10:22 Plansix wrote:
Republicans would oppose moving voting days to weekends because it would mean higher turn out. And democrats play identity politics to get the minority vote, politics as usual Catering to religious conservatives and people that are super into the confederate flag is just identity politics by another name. Hence the voter suppression.
So what you're saying is each party is looking out for its own interests, not for the interests of the people. Breaking news
|
On May 16 2017 10:30 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2017 10:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On May 16 2017 10:07 ChristianS wrote:On May 16 2017 10:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On May 16 2017 08:58 Danglars wrote:On May 16 2017 08:28 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On May 16 2017 08:12 Danglars wrote:On May 16 2017 07:35 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On May 16 2017 07:24 xDaunt wrote:On May 16 2017 06:44 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
[quote]
Literally every other Republican candidate (besides Carson when he was sleepwalking) could speak in complete sentences, which is a low threshold for the President of the United States but at least disqualifies Donald Trump.
I don't understand why you're so closed-minded when it comes to politics. Why is "being a Democrat" automatic disqualification, in your opinion? I'm not close minded to anything. My political values distinctly align with the political Right. When the democrats start pushing a Right-leaning agenda, then I'll consider voting for them. So your values "distinctly align" with killing healthcare, killing education, taking from the poor to give to the rich, and suppressing civil rights? Because in 2017, we're way passed saying something as unnuanced as "I'm a Republican because I believe in fiscal responsibility". There is sooo much more to that party, and it's killing our country. Like, excuse us Republicans, we're trying to have a society over here... I don't know why you even affect to discuss values. If your only experience with political values is the disingenuous political talking points like Republicans want to push granny of the cliff, you neither know nor understand the values. Furthermore, it's hard to see if explaining them will actually produce understanding. We're trying to have a debate, you're trying to declare victory over the debate and move on. It's a very stultifying concept and ought to be relegated to authoritarian societies. How is it disengenuous when the push for the AHCA over the ACA is a very real possibility by Republicans? You really can't get much closer to pushing granny off a cliff than that. killing healthcare, killing education, taking from the poor to give to the rich, and suppressing civil rights it's killing our country The discussion was political values and you're busy dishing out Democratic talking points. That's absolutely disingenuous. Perhaps you'd only recognize that if you said you had differing political values, and I offered that you wanted to bankrupt the country, remove political power from elected leaders, trash civil rights, and subvert the rule of law. Oh, and then I defend myself by saying that all these things are true, why bother denying it? I'm referring to that disingenuousness. It's entirely self serving to disparage support for the GOP ("you're so close minded") and then ignore the political values that align (all the partisan attacks on policy arguments). He said he could never vote Democrat "for obvious reasons", and I asked him why and he said because he aligns with the political Right, and then I listed some very real platforms that the Republican Party has been pushing and asked him if he actually aligns with those ideas, and then you came in, accusing me of dishing out Democratic talking points. It's not partisan to point out that Republicans are actively trying to undermine the ideas I listed. They're objectively doing that by trying to replace the ACA with the AHCA, favoring charter schools over fixing public education, giving tax breaks to the rich and ignoring the middle class, and setting us back plenty on civil rights issues. All of those are facts. You accusing me of pushing these facts with the intent of pushing partisanship is only validating the idea that the Democrats are more sensible than Republicans in these areas. Your indignant "How dare you!" isnt a counterargument. You get how these aren't exactly impartial descriptions of these situations, right? I mean I agree with your assessments ultimately, but you have to realize that those are not just facts, they're judgments based partly on your political opinions. The educational research and data of public and charter schools don't even remotely support charter schools and the illusion of "school choice" as plausible solutions to our education system. The experts understand that, but then you have Betsy DeVos in charge instead of qualified people. It's not a casual difference of perspective or "based on my political opinions", and I think it should be repeated that one "side" is based on facts while the other "side" is not. And on a similar note, there is plenty of data surrounding the importance of social and racial and gender equity and equality in a society, and it is absolutely not merely my political opinion that Republican leaders are finding ways to support the disenfranchisement of certain groups of people, whether it's based on voting restrictions, looking the other way when police overstep their boundaries, ignoring women's rights (not just solely an abortion issue), and treating the LGBT community like utter trash. These have long since been documented, and pointing these out is not just my political opinion. I worry that the argument of "You have your political opinions and the other people have theirs" is an equivocation of the legitimacy that one opinion may have over the other. Not all opinions are equal or even really opinions, much like the misnomered evolution vs. creationism "debate", as if they're equally valid. (And fittingly, anti-science agendas fit neatly in the Republican domain as well, from ignoring climate change to promoting the "teach the controversy" nonsense. These are verifiable policies that some of the very socially conservative/ religious conservatives push, and calling an ignorant spade an ignorant spade might be crass but it's not automatically illegitimate.) Where does pushing granny off a cliff factor in? Do you think Republicans hate their grandparents?
Danglars said that as a strawman to the very real problem of Republicans pushing the AHCA as a replacement of the ACA, and while the ACA isn't a perfect solution to healthcare, pretty much every medical and health organization has made statements that the AHCA would be incredibly destructive, not to mention kick millions off healthcare. Now if you want to assume that that includes grandmas, then be my guest, but stating that the AHCA is objectively worse than what we have is an argument backed by the experts (to the extreme that even the Republican monolith has chipped a bit and had some dissension over the AHCA), and isn't just the thought of an arbitrary liberal.
|
On May 16 2017 10:22 Plansix wrote:
Republicans would oppose moving voting days to weekends because it would mean higher turn out.
I mean, they did close down Sunday early voting in specific districts in North Carolina (five guesses which districts). Thank the lord the attempts to immediately strip the governor of the power to control things like that once a Democrat won got blocked by the courts.
|
On May 16 2017 10:35 biology]major wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2017 10:33 Plansix wrote:On May 16 2017 10:29 biology]major wrote:On May 16 2017 10:22 Plansix wrote:
Republicans would oppose moving voting days to weekends because it would mean higher turn out. And democrats play identity politics to get the minority vote, politics as usual Catering to religious conservatives and people that are super into the confederate flag is just identity politics by another name. Hence the voter suppression. So what you're saying is each party is looking out for its own interests, not for the interests of the people. Breaking news
Well one is actively trying to repress the voting rights American citizens. But if you think that is just part of the game, that's your opinion. But I think you can't blame people for calling that view a little racist.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
