US Politics Mega-thread - Page 2163

On March 05 2020 04:51 Zambrah wrote:
Are we even sure Republicans will let any supreme court nominees through? Are we going to start presuming their scrupulous enough to stop doing that now, because I feel like they're still plenty capable of lobbying and all excuses to justify just not confirming anything whatsoever and noone doing anything about it

On March 05 2020 04:51 Zambrah wrote:
Are we even sure Republicans will let any supreme court nominees through? Are we going to start presuming their scrupulous enough to stop doing that now, because I feel like they're still plenty capable of lobbying and all excuses to justify just not confirming anything whatsoever and noone doing anything about it

On March 05 2020 04:57 Gorsameth wrote:
Doesn't matter much who the Presidential Candidate is be it Biden, Bernie or Jesus himself. If the Democrats don't get a majority in both chambers not much progressive is getting done, Policies and Judges.
They didn't get punished for it last time, why stop now.

On March 05 2020 05:00 GreenHorizons wrote:


All Dem majorities aren't equal, a lot of the progressive policy put forward by Bernie and even Warren was actively shot down by other Democrats (that have gone on to back Biden over Bernie).

On March 05 2020 05:06 Gorsameth wrote:
yeah, because the parties are pre-packed coalitions and not every Democrat is interested in the same thing.
Same thing with Republicans where you have the tea party and the rest at opposites so the only thing they can agree on is that they should pay less taxes.

On March 05 2020 05:37 JimmiC wrote:

Do genuine elections happen in your preferred form of government LM socialism? Can you explain what your criteria is for a genuine election? Can you give me some examples of genuine elections that I can look into?

On March 05 2020 05:47 JimmiC wrote:

marxism leninism socialism I could see how me mixing up the order of the two names involved in your preferred political system could throw you for such a loop that you would have no understanding of what I was saying. My apologies.

edit: Here I will add your quote so my dyslexia doesn't offend you.

On March 05 2020 06:09 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:


The question isn't about degree; it's not about quantifying exactly what percent better of an option Biden is than Trump. Plenty of us would prefer Sanders (or other alternatives) over either of them, but in the (very likely to happen in real life) hypothetical scenario of a Biden vs. Trump general election, the only question that matters is: Who would be even the slightest bit better for the country, the general population, and the world? That's the easiest question to answer ever, and as much as I dislike Biden, it's a super easy vote for me.

Anyone who thinks that Biden and Trump are literally politically equivalent is just plain wrong. 4 more years under Trump will still be worse than 4 years under Biden. Biden isn't ideal... far from it... but not voting for Biden (abstaining all together, third-party voting, explicitly voting for Trump) is a step in the wrong direction for anyone who considers themselves liberal (let alone progressive).

I have a bunch of friends who are hardcore Sanders supporters, and most of us are willing to unify behind the eventual Democratic candidate, whether it's Sanders or Biden. We don't like it, but we understand what's actually at stake here. The other few supporters are essentially having a super petty, bratty, emotional meltdown at the moment, insisting that they'd rather watch the country burn to the ground than support the lesser of two evils "on principle". I'll take acknowledging climate change (and "facts"), giving a shit about at least some level of healthcare, re-appointing credentialed individuals to influential departments like education and science, and dodging another one or two conservative Supreme Court Justices over... Trump, any day of the week. I would prefer sweeping progressive changes, but if it's between Trump and Biden, it's Biden.

On March 05 2020 06:44 JimmiC wrote:


Well you seem to be constantly attacking Liberal democracies on the basis of things like Gitmo, so I thought it was reasonable to ask if the system you prefer is better?

What I would prefer is you just stopped with it all together as well, but whataboutism on things like Gitmo or imperialism or anything is your main tool to attack dems. It only seems fair that you defend your preferred political system on the same grounds?

If you don't think it is fair, and don't like defending in that way, stop attacking in that way.

On March 05 2020 06:46 LegalLord wrote:

I think the relative merits of Biden and Trump have already been discussed, and whether or not they're significantly different or not is largely a matter of how you value certain things. But I do want to note the inherent disdain in this post for voting "on principle" against Biden. Seems pretty short-sighted, to be honest.

It's true that sometimes it's necessary to vote for a candidate that is quite undesirable to prevent a significantly worse one from being elected. That'd be a reasonable assertion in the 2016 election, since things seemed to play out such that the two candidates on top were both... less than loved. But I will note that this:



is 100% bullshit. I'll reiterate a point I made two pages ago:



Let's put aside whether he's 0.01% better or 99% better for the moment; that would definitely make a material difference, but the point was "even the slightest bit better" so even the 0.01% would be grounds to vote for Biden, seems to be the implication.

I suppose you end up with a better candidate that way, in the short term. But the problem is that that is indeed a very short-sighted approach. Again, it might be necessary occasionally (say, 2016), but if it turns out to be just a pattern of forcing such candidates through the selection process (e.g. if the candidate who lost in 2016 is replaced by a carbon copy in 2020), then you're just agreeing to lose ground over time. Next time the DNC will prop up Bloomer, then it'll be Romney who just decided to join the Democratic party, and since you've already "bit the bullet" and gave up so much ground so willingly, why not Ted Cruz as the new Democratic nominee? Or, you could avoid supporting the DNC's shady behavior "on principle" and have a chance to stop it from going in that direction.

Maybe for you, Biden is significantly better. That's not an unreasonable conclusion to come to; I certainly would have a much easier time seeing it that way if he was still his 2008-2012 self. But neither is it an unreasonable conclusion to decide that "falling in line" after getting screwed over is the wrong approach that should indeed be rejected on principle.

On March 05 2020 06:29 Mohdoo wrote:


The validity of this perspective will essentially be shown by how things play out with Bernie in 2020. Clinton loses ---> Trump wins --> Trump does tons of shit liberals hate --> liberals are fired up -->...

--> Sanders wins --> There is a material benefit to holding voters over a flame to show them the value in participating and bettering the world

or,

--> Sanders still loses after 4 years of Trump --> the impact of Trump was basically purely negative, as Trump was not enough to inspire "real" change in following years.

I used to subscribe to the idea that people need to suffer before they participate, but it appears that cultural hegemony and other dynamics have created a situation where the American public is remarkably apathetic. People basically believe nothing matters, even today, after 3 years of Trump.

I'm still cheering for Bernie and I still think he can do it. But if he doesn't, I have an easier time accepting short-term solutions because it would imply people need to start like actually starving before they start to wonder if our current situation is acceptable.

France is good at rioting. We need to be better.