EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 2559
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24146 Posts
| ||
|
Nevuk
United States16280 Posts
On August 14 2020 06:19 GreenHorizons wrote: Cohen was instrumental in many of Trump's crimes and should be writing/lying about them from a cell (under our carceral system) and all the proceeds should be confiscated. He's still under house arrest. The only reason he was let out was due to COVID, and he claims the arrest of him to put him back into prison was to prevent this book release - which a judge has agreed with. A three year prison sentence is fairly lengthy for a "white collar" criminal (he's on the edge, and is really guilty of non-white collar felonies that the feds probably declined to charge). He flipped and much of what we know about Trump's crimes is due to this flipping. My only complaint about his sentence is that non-white collar crimes by non-whites should be given the same level of leniency. I can see the argument that he shouldn't be profiting from his crimes even indirectly, but given that he's in jail and had to forfeit considerable assets, I'm OK with it. So long as no one is incentivized to commit crime in order to write a tell-all book, it is on my "that's fine" list. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27219 Posts
On August 14 2020 05:44 JimmiC wrote: I would like to say this is one of the worst Trump calls but it probably does not come close. But he made new rules about shower head efficiency (taking away the rules meant to reduce water usage, a pretty big deal) because he felt he was not able to wash his hair fast enough. Also changing the rules on toilets and sinks. Changing things for the worse because he wants it that way despite no public outcry kind of sums up the type of "leader" Trump is, a guy who only cares about himself and his comforts. https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/newspolitics/trump-changing-us-showerhead-rules-after-complaining-about-his-hair/ar-BB17VxnI?li=AAggNb9 For Christ’s sake. While by no means his most idiotic push, it comes close to being the perfect illustration on how he just does things on a complete whim. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24146 Posts
If people don't have one, even the moderate stuff Biden proposes will go nowhere right? | ||
|
farvacola
United States18866 Posts
| ||
|
Nevuk
United States16280 Posts
On August 14 2020 06:54 GreenHorizons wrote: Can anyone paint me the scenario they imagine where Republicans are less of a legislative obstacle than they were when Obama had majorities in both houses? If people don't have one, even the moderate stuff Biden proposes will go nowhere right? Only if the filibuster gets nuked and Democrats have a majority in both houses. No chance otherwise. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24146 Posts
On August 14 2020 06:56 farvacola wrote: Republicans weren’t really a true legislative obstacle during Obama’s first term if one considers how many unforced concessions were made by Dems across the board. Legislators like AOC change the game this time around considerably imo. To that point, it wasn't the House that was the true obstacle either. I don't think AOC changes that at all. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18866 Posts
| ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18382 Posts
On August 14 2020 07:01 Nevuk wrote: Only if the filibuster gets nuked and Democrats have a majority in both houses. No chance otherwise. Didn't the filibuster already get nuked? | ||
micronesia
United States24782 Posts
| ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22487 Posts
On August 14 2020 07:23 micronesia wrote: I have no issue with listening to their input, and that is what should happen in the committees where most stuff originates from, what I understand. But by no means would I advocate compromise if it is not required. If the Democrats over the next few years get a supermajority in congress to the point that republican support is not at all needed to pass 100% of the democratic agenda (with a Biden rubber stamp), should the Democrats give the republicans a chance to at least provide input and make suggestions, or should the democrats 100% ignore the republicans and tell them they can do zero until they get a larger slice of the electoral pie? I feel like the latter is what would happen at this point if the roles were reversed, and I'm never sure how far the democrats should go with sinking down to their opposition's level for this stuff. The GOP has repeatedly proven they don't want to play ball, until they show real change in that I don't see why you should pretend otherwise. On August 14 2020 06:54 GreenHorizons wrote: I think we mentioned this already for the 2016 election with Hillary, and Biden might be less terrible from a GOP standpoint but I don't expect the result to be different. Can anyone paint me the scenario they imagine where Republicans are less of a legislative obstacle than they were when Obama had majorities in both houses? If people don't have one, even the moderate stuff Biden proposes will go nowhere right? Without control of both chambers nothing will get done. That is how the American system works if one side wills it. Currently its actually more like a super majority because of the filibuster. | ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
On August 13 2020 23:09 Doodsmack wrote: My own suspicion was that Floyd was already dead when the paramedics arrived (which the paramedics knew amongst themselves after they checked the pulse). I've seen something similar in other videos like this where the paramedics show up, check the pulse and realize that the cops just killed the person, and then kind of act as though everything is fine. Guess they don't really want to raise a fuss at the scene? This doesn't matter. The vast majority of pre-hospital cardiac arrests are pretty much 100% dead by the time we get there. That said, paramedics don't have the authority to not immediately start resuscitation unless there are obvious signs of death (which there's 0% chance of being in Floyd's case; it takes a significant amount of time or massive trauma for those to occur). These medics were slow as fuck and seemed quite lost. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27219 Posts
On August 14 2020 07:48 Stratos_speAr wrote: This doesn't matter. The vast majority of pre-hospital cardiac arrests are pretty much 100% dead by the time we get there. That said, paramedics don't have the authority to not immediately start resuscitation unless there are obvious signs of death (which there's 0% chance of being in Floyd's case; it takes a significant amount of time or massive trauma for those to occur). These medics were slow as fuck and seemed quite lost. I’ve sworn off watching footage of that kind for my own mental health, was there any other mitigating factor that might explain their failures in your opinion in this instance? I take it we’re talking a delay in an attempt to resuscitate with paddles as opposed to CPR? The latter of which despite being portrayed as some miracle process so frequently in fictional media isn’t all that effective right? | ||
|
Nevuk
United States16280 Posts
On August 14 2020 07:23 micronesia wrote: If the Democrats over the next few years get a supermajority in congress to the point that republican support is not at all needed to pass 100% of the democratic agenda (with a Biden rubber stamp), should the Democrats give the republicans a chance to at least provide input and make suggestions, or should the democrats 100% ignore the republicans and tell them they can do zero until they get a larger slice of the electoral pie? I feel like the latter is what would happen at this point if the roles were reversed, and I'm never sure how far the democrats should go with sinking down to their opposition's level for this stuff. They should be told to kick sand. The covid response alone from Trump is sufficient that their party should be torn to the ground and have the earth salted over it. If they want to reform a new party with the same principles and basic philosophy, that's fine with me. But they need to at least give up their name. The filibuster was only nuked for appointments in 2014, and supreme court in 2017. Once it got nuked for one thing, it was inevitable that it would get nuked for everything (this was the criticism of Reid revoking it. Not wrong, but I would argue McConnell's abuse of it was what made it inevitable.) It is a tool that only works when both sides are using it in good faith. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24146 Posts
On August 14 2020 07:11 farvacola wrote: Come on GH, you and I both know its unfair to AOC and the people she inspires to limit her influence to Congress itself. I'll note Omar outperformed the polling significantly a day or so ago, these women (and men like Ro Khanna) represent something real. Will have to get an Uber XL now for after work drinks to commiserate about the illegal war they voted against but is happening anyway instead of fitting in a cab I guess? I just wanted to know what's after Trump's gone and I realized Democrat's impotence is going to be Republican obstructionism's fault indefinitely. There's not going to be any pushing of Biden and Harris to the left or sincere expectation that even their most modest proposals will be more than rhetoric even if they win and have majorities. Neoliberalism/Democrats don't even have a fantasy where they actually get the policy they will admit is needed to mitigate the worst timelines we face. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27219 Posts
On August 14 2020 08:10 Nevuk wrote: They should be told to kick sand. The covid response alone from Trump is sufficient that their party should be torn to the ground and have the earth salted over it. If they want to reform a new party with the same principles and basic philosophy, that's fine with me. But they need to at least give up their name. The filibuster was only nuked for appointments in 2014, and supreme court in 2017. Once it got nuked for one thing, it was inevitable that it would get nuked for everything (this was the criticism of Reid revoking it. Not wrong, but I would argue McConnell's abuse of it was what made it inevitable.) It is a tool that only works when both sides are using it in good faith. Hey now tell us how you really feel! Some liberal paraphrasing and I feel it’s apt for the current incarnation of the Republican Party I’m kind of unsure as to why we’re at the state of affairs we are now, but hey. On at least a few issues that have really sizeable public support the Dems have compromised with Republicans and really for what? Stuff is as fractious as ever, if not more so. Compromising hasn’t ‘healed the nation’, if anything the GOP has doubled down considerably on the rhetoric regardless of throwing them bones. Some issues will be more fractious and right sure, something like healthcare reform really the numbers have been consistently way in favour of reform so just take the hit there. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
I'm sure this will come as a surprise to people that claimed Trump's embassy move to Jerusalem spelled doom to future progress in the region. It turns out that the Palestinians are increasingly distanced from sympathetic countries, and more neighbors see themselves closer to Israel than Iran's increasing influence in the region. In other news, Barr is announcing developments in the Durham probe tomorrow. I'm guessing that it is announcing criminal charge against people that knowingly falsified reports in order to help obtain the FISA warrants for wiretaps of Trump campaign figures. It could also be findings of bias or dismissals from the DOJ for violating department policy on counterintelligence and unmasking. | ||
|
StalkerTL
212 Posts
They’re also fairly indifferent to Palestinians. Not to mention the annexation of the West Bank isn’t even really supported by half of Bibi’s base because it’s a clusterfuck. No one wants to provide a solution to displaced Palestinians. Do they become citizens under annexation, get exiled to be someone else’s problem (or even the problem is other Israeli regions) or murdered (which obviously is a pretty awful look)? It’s like a lot of things in politics where parties use it as an easy wedge issue but don’t really want to go the full mile of actually resolving the problem once and for all (because that would get rid of the wedge issue to drum up support). A good chunk of Bibi’s base would love for Palestinians to just disappear but there’s no “easy” way of doing that. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27219 Posts
I mean aside from the rather cringey titling of the ‘President’s Vision for Peace’ (Jesus really?) that does seem a promising development of affairs. Yeah well fair play. Some of us like myself will never be satisfied of course, given the UAE has a pretty chequered approach to all things human rights and sorting that out has never been any kind of impediment to Western money flowing in. Still yes, I’ll count this in the ‘win’ column if it actually has bound Israel into halting settlement expansion. | ||
| ||
